The field of honor : being a complete and comprehensive history of duelling in all countries; including the judicial duel of Europe, the private duel of the civilized world, and specific descriptions of all the noted hostile meetings in Europe and America

To

HONORABLE LELAND STANFORD

EX-GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA
AND

President of the Central Pacific Railroad
\Amicus hutnani generis\

THE

FIELD OF HONOR:

BEING

A COMPLETE AND COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY
OF DUELLING IN ALL COUNTRIES;

INCLUDING

The Judicial Duel of Europe, the Private Duel of the

Civilized World, and Specific Descriptions of All

the Noted Hostile Meetings in Europe

and America.

By MAJOR BEN C. TRUMAN,

Author of "THE SOUTH AFTER THE WAR," "SEMI-TROPICAL CALIFORNIA,
"OCCIDENTAL SKETCHES," Etc.

NEW YORK :

FORDS, HOWARD, & HULBERT.

1884.

COPYRIGHT, 1883,
By BEN C. TRUMAN.

R
JT75

'-7

CONTENTS.

PAGE

INTRODUCTION 9

CHAPTER

I. DUELLING IN FRANCE 19

II. DUELLING IN ENGLAND 30

III. DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND 39

IV. DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES 54

V. DUELLING IN AMERICA 76

VI. INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE 118

VII. VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING 130

VIII. CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN 147

IX. DUELLING IN THE DARK 161

X. NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS 179

XI. EUROPEAN DUELS— Continued 204

XII. EUROPEAN DUELS— Continued 221

XIII. EUROPEAN DUELS — Concluded 242

XIV. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS 258

XV. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 280

XVI. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 300

XVII. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 334

XVIII. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 366

8 CONTENTS.

CHAPTER , PAGB

XIX. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 374

XX. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— Continued 383

XXI. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Continued 392

XXII. NOTED AMERICAN DUELS — Concluded 411

XXIII. BLOODLESS DUELS 421

XXIV. THE RAREST KIND OF BRAVERY 434

XXV. DUELLISTS OF MANY TYPES 448

XXVI. REMORSE OF DUELLISTS 476

XXVII. NOTABLE ESCAPES 485

XXVIII. PATHOS AND SENTIMENT 493

XXIX. THE ROMANCE OF DUELLING 504

XXX. HUMORS AND PLEASANTRIES OF THE FIELD 528

XXXI. HUMORS AND PLEASANTRIES OF THE FIELD — Con-
cluded 553

INTRODUCTION.

DUELLING, as it is more or less resorted to, even to-
day, in civilized countries, undoubtedly took its rise
from the judicial combats of Celtic nations, and was
first introduced among the Lombards, in 659. Un-
like the hostile meetings which have grown out of
the original system, the early duel appears to have
been a trial by combat of two individuals for the
determination either of the guilt or the innocence of
the person charged with crime, or for other purposes
of decision. This early mode of appeal to arms as
an alternative for the trial by ordeal, as the reader
will perceive, although it gave birth to the more
modern system of combat, is somewhat different from
those conflicts of the present age which are the
culminations of voluntary challenges or defiances
resorted to for the purpose of settling disputes sup-
posed to involve the honor of gentlemen — and which
last custom was first elevated to the dignity of an
institution in 1308, in France, by one Philip le Bel.

It is proper to state, before proceeding further, that
the writer is aware that there are those who main-
tain that duelling may be traced back to the Hebrews
and to other ancient peoples ; and that the mortal
combats between David and Goliath, 1063 years

I O INTR OD UCTION

B.C.; Pittacus and Phyrnon, 547 B.C.; Jonathan and
Pudens, also at an early date ; the Horatii of the
Romans and the Curatii of the Albans, 667 B.C.; and
other lesser scenes of mortal combat, have been
characterized as duels. But he prefers acquiescence
in the views entertained by those eminent authori-
ties who declare that " no trace of the duel as an
institution is to be found in the history of the classical
nations of antiquity." It is an historical fact that
Antony sent a challenge to Caesar ; still, duelling as
an institution undoubtedly took its rise, as has been
heretofore stated, about the middle, or possibly at
the commencement, of the seventh century, although
authorized, according to Blackstone, in 501 by Gunde-
bald, king of the Burgundians.

Simply, the appeal to arms, as we may justly term
the judicial combat, was an appeal to high Heaven,
or to God ; and none were exempt from the trial by
battle but women, the sick and the maimed, and per-
sons under sixteen years of age and above sixty;
while ecclesiastics, priests, and monks were permitted
to produce substitutes (or champions, as they were
called in that day) in their stead. All of the arrange-
ments for the judicial duel were of the most solemn
character, and elaborate and dramatic almost beyond
belief. This custom of appeal to the judgment of
God seems to us, in the present day, as something
wild and ridiculous, and more sacrilegious than re-
ligious ; still, as will be seen by the description of
the judicial battle which is presented, the voice of
reason, authority, and prudence was heard, though its
dictates were utterly mistaken; and it will also be
seen that the combatants seemingly met without
anger, and left vengeance to the Great Arbiter.

INTRODUCTION. II

Even before the practice of duelling for settling
affairs of honor took its rise, however, the judicial
battle had degenerated into a convenient pretext for
the ceremonious meeting of hostile and revengeful
men under protection of law.

The general practice of duelling for settling affairs
of honor may be said to have commenced in the year
1527, at the breaking up of a treaty between the
Emperor Charles V. and King Francis I., the former
having commanded Francis' herald to acquaint his
sovereign that he (Charles) would henceforth con-
sider Francis as not only a base violator of public
faith, but as a stranger to the honor and integrity
becoming a gentleman. Francis, too high-spirited to
bear such an imputation with composure, had re-
course to an unusual expedient to vindicate his
character ; and instantly sent back the bearer with a
cartel of defiance, in which he gave Charles the lie in
form, and challenged him to single combat, requiring
him to at once name the time and place of the pro-
posed encounter, and the weapons with which he
chose to fight. Charles, not inferior to his turbulent
rival in spirit or bravery, readily accepted the chal-
lenge ; but, after several messages concerning the
arrangement of all the circumstances relative to the
hostile meeting, with mutual reproaches, all thoughts
of a duel, more becoming heroes of romance than the
two greatest monarchs of the age, were entirely laid
aside.

But the example of two personages so illustrious
drew such general attention, and carried with it so
much authority, that it created an important change
all over Europe; and duels, which had hitherto j
been fought under judicial appointment, were freely

1 2 IN TROD UCTIOtf.

indulged in without the interpretation of juris-
prudence, and in cases to which the laws did not
extend. From that moment, upon every affront or
injury which seemed to touch his honor, a gentleman
considered himself entitled to draw his sword and
demand reparation from his adversary. The result
was that men of fierce courage and high spirit, and
also those of rude manners, were quick to give and
take offence with fatal consequences ; much of the
best blood of Christendom was brutally spilled, many
valuable lives were surrendered, and at some periods
war itself was scarcely more destructive than these
so-called contests of honor. So cruel and outrageous
did the custom become, that noted professional duel-
lists— many of whom prided themselves upon the
advantages they had taken — who had neither wit,
wisdom, face, figure, nor fortune, came into great
favor with women in England and France ; and the
sovereigns of Europe became so alarmed, at this
juncture, at the dreadful depopulation of chivalry
and gentry, that they took highly aggressive action
in favor of its abatement.

The power and influence of the Roman Catholic
Church, even, was exerted to restrain the bloody
despotism of the bloody code ; and, during the
twenty-fifth session of the Council of Trent, it was
decreed that the custom was detestable, and the
Council decreed the excommunication of seconds and
all associates, as well as principals, and even the
lookers-on at a duel. It claimed that the custom was
created by Satan for the destruction of body and
soul, and it excommunicated "all advisers, sup-
porters, witnesses, and all others in any way con-
cerned."

INTRODUCTION. 13

But there has been, really, no time in its history
when duelling has not had many earnest and eminent
opponents, notwithstanding the esteem in which true
chivalry and valor have always been held in every
age and country ; and notwithstanding the popular
reign of the custom itself for hundreds of years.
When Octavius Caesar received a challenge from Marc
Antony to engage him in single combat, he very calmly
answered : " If Antony is weary of life, tell him there
are other ways to death than the point of my sword."
This was the noble reply of one of the most illus-
trious men of the age in which he lived, and must
have commanded the admiration of all who loved to
behold exhibitions of discretion and gallantry.
Joseph II. of Germany, a most amiable monarch, was
a conspicuous enemy to duelling, and has left his
sentiments on record : " The custom is detestable,"
he once declared, "and shall not be permitted to
thrive in my army. I despise men who send and
accept challenges to meet each other in mortal com-
bat. Such men, in my estimation, are worse than the
Roman gladiators. I am resolved that this bar-
barous custom, which is worthy of the age of Tamer-
lane and Bajazet, and which is so often fatal to the
peace of families, shall be punished and suppressed,
though it should cost me half my officers." Henry
II. of France, after the death of his beloved Chas-
taignerie, made a solemn vow never, during his reign,
to admit of another duel on any pretext whatever.
Henry himself, however, met his death by a blow
from Montgomeri's lance during a tournament given
in honor of the marriage, by proxy, of Elizabeth to
Philip II., at Paris. Queens Anne and Elizabeth,
Charles II. and George III., of England, all issued

14 INTRODUCTION,

vigorous edicts against duelling. It may be inter-
posed that Elizabeth, upon receiving the intelligence
of the marriage of Charles, her royal lover, declared
in a state of great rage that " if she were a man, she
would have defied him to single combat." So she
did. But Elizabeth had been jilted, the reader must
understand, and she was necessarily violently angered.
She was a "woman scorned," to the fullest degree,
and was not in her proper state of mind. So, too,
when Essex — after his fondness for Elizabeth had
somewhat cooled — was wounded by Blount (who had
been made the recipient of some mark of the Queen's
favor), the haughty daughter of Henry declared, dis-
dainfully, that she was gratified to know " that some
one had been found who could take down the arro-
gant Earl and teach him certain proprieties."

Alexander Hamilton, the most eminent American
ever killed in duel, left a paper containing his opin-
ions of the custom, in which he stated: " My religious
and moral principles are strongly opposed to the
practice of duelling; and it would ever give me pain
to shed the blood of a fellow-creature in a private
combat, forbidden by the laws." And yet, in twenty-
four hours after the ink had become dry with which
those imperishable words had been written, this
illustrious statesman and general had fallen mortally
wounded, and had yielded up a noble life a victim to
the very custom whose adamantine mandates he did
not possess sufficient greatness of character under the
circumstances to resist. The writer has never been
able to comprehend how it was possible for Hamil-
ton to have met Burr in mortal combat — how it was
possible for any man to have chanced^ the extension
of the circle of widows and orphans who, twenty-four

INTRODUCTION. 1 5

hours before his fall from an antagonist's bullet, had
written : " My wife and children are extremely dear
to me, and my life is of the utmost importance to
them, in various views."

What a contrast was the course of United States
Senator Barnwell Rhett, of South Carolina — the
home of sectional and political Hotspurs during ante-
bellum days — in his answer to Senator Jeremiah Cle-
mens, of Alabama, on the 28th of February, 1852 !
Rhett had declared, in a speech, a few days before, in
the Senate of the United States, that he was in favor
of the exercise of the right of secession ; and claimed
that, "without the right of secession, we live under a
consolidated despotism." Clemens, in reply, charged
the South Carolinian with knavery and treason ; and,
again, in replying to further remarks from Rhett,
said : " He says that I called him a knave and a trai-
tor. No man who heard that speech of mine ever
entertained such an opinion but himself. The allu-
sion to knavery was an illustration, not a charge.
But, if I had done so, the subsequent course of that
Senator justifies me in adding the epithet of coward
to that of knave and traitor. He does not deserve
the character of a man. No man, with the feeling of
a man in his bosom, who believed such a charge was
pending against him, would have sought redress here : he
would have looked for it elsewhere /" This was, indeed,
wrathful and inflammable ; and the portion italicized
is incapable of but one meaning : it was an unmis-
takable invitation for Greek to meet Greek ; or, at
least, a savage intimation that the turbulent Ala-
bamian was awaiting a challenge from the impetuous
Carolinian. All of which elicited the following from
Rhett, in the course of an elaborate reply : " But my

1 6 INTRODUCTION.

second reason for not calling the Senator from Ala-
bama into the field was of a still higher and more
controlling nature. For twenty years I have been a
member of the Church of Christ. The Senator
knows it ; everybody knows it. I cannot and will
not dishonor my religious profession. / frankly
admit that I fear God more than I fear man. True cour-
age is best evinced by the firm maintenance of our
principles amidst all temptations and all trials."
There was an exhibition of true bravery ; which,
while it may have spoiled a sensation, saved the com-
mission of a crime, displayed exceeding nobility of
character, and possibly kept woe and mourning from
more than one domestic altar. Volumes might
be written, interspersed with anecdotes or illustra-
tions similar to the foregoing, to demonstrate the
earnestness of the opposition to duelling, and the
characteristic and lasting aversion in which certain
notorious persons are held, or have been held, who
have enjoyed the " honor" of politely killing their
fellow-man.

Duelling, however, it is claimed by many, has had
some advantages, especially in England, Ireland, and
America ; and to the custom may, in a degree, so it
is claimed, be ascribed the extraordinary gentleness
and complaisance of modern manners, and that re-
spectful attention of one man to another which at
present renders the social intercourse of life far
more agreeable and careful than among the most
civilized and cultivated nations prior to the com-
mencement of the century in which we live. Those
few people in English-speaking countries who defend
duelling at present do so on the ground that it com-
pensates for the insufficiency of legal justice, and are

IN TROD UC TION. 1 7

not inclined to look upon the custom as a relic of
barbarism. They assume that law is not as effica-
cious as lead. In the eradication of the evil they
believe that an offended party has no positive means
of repairing the injury put upon him ; or, in other
words, that nothing but a hostile meeting can dissi-
pate the offence.

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER I.
DUELLING IN FRANCE.

Description of the Judicial Duel — Prohibition of Judicial Duelling
in France — Rage of Private Duelling among the French —
Startling Statistics — Customs in France at the Present Time —
The Skewer-Duel in the French Army — The Fencing-Schools of

Paris — Capricious Vigeant— Rochefort, Cassagnac, Chapron, and

Clemenceau.

THERE is a very ancient edict in France forbidding
duels in all civil causes, and in criminal causes limit-
ing them to five cases. St. Louis afterward took off
all restrictions; but his grandson, Philip the Fourth,
incited by a motive deserving praise, and with the
hope of decreasing the amount of bloodshed, restored
the restrictions in 1303, though in 1308 he estab-
lished the combat in criminal cases. As nearly as
can be ascertained, the custom of judicial combats
was kept up in France for upward of nine hundred
years — say from about 660 until 1547. The great
Due de Sully, who did all in his power to urge his
master, Henry IV., to repress duelling, has left the
best account of the manner in which the ancient (or
judicial) duel was fought that can be found.

2O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

"In the first place," says De Sully, " nobody, how-
ever offended, might take vengeance in his own right.
They had their judges before whom he that thought
himself injured was to give an account of the wrong
suffered, and demand permission to prove, in the way
of arms, that he did not lay upon his enemy a false
accusation. It was then considered as shameful to
desire blood for blood. The judge, who was com-
monly the lord of the place, made the person accused
appear before htm; and never allowed the decision of
battle — which was demanded by throwing a glove (or
some other pledge) upon the ground — but when he
could get no other proof of either guilt or innocence.
The pledges were received, and the judge deferred
the decision of the quarrel to the end of two months,
during the first of which the two enemies were deliv-
ered, each of them, to common friends, upon security
for their forthcoming; and then their friends endeav-
ored, by all sorts of means, to discover the person
criminal, and to give him a sense of the injustice of
maintaining a falsehood, from which he could expect
nothing but the loss of his reputation, of his life, and
of his soul ! — for they were persuaded, with the utmost
degree of certainty, that Heaven always gave the vic-
tory to the right cause; and, therefore, a duel, in their
opinion, was an action of which the event could be
determined by no human power. When the two
months were expired, the two rivals were put into a
close prison and committed to the ecclesiastics, who
employed every motive to make them change their
designs. If, after all this, they still persisted, a day
was at last fixed to end their quarrel. When the day
was come, the two men were brought, fasting in the
morning, before the same judge, who obliged both of

DUELLING IN FRANCE. 21

them to declare upon oath that they said the truth,
after which they were permitted to eat; they were
then armed in the presence of the judge, the kind of
arms being likewise settled; four seconds, chosen with
much ceremony, saw them undressed and anointed all
over the body with oil, and saw their beards and hair
cut close. They were then conducted into an enclosed
ground, and guarded by armed men, having been
made to repeat, for the last time, their assertions and
accusations. They were not even then suffered to
advance to the combat; that moment their seconds
joined them at the two ends of the field for another
ceremony which, of itself, was enough to make their
weapons drop from their hands, at least if there had
remained any friendship between them. Their sec-
onds made them join hands, with the fingers of one
put between the fingers of the other; they demanded
justice from one another, and were conjured on each
side not to support a falsity; they solemnly promised
to act upon terms of honor, and not to aim at victory
by fraud or enchantment. The seconds examined
their arms, piece by piece, to see that nothing was
wanting, and then conducted the principals to the
two ends of the lists, where they made them say their
prayers and make their confession; then, asking each
of them whether he had any message to send to his
adversary, they suffered them to advance, which they
did at the signal of the herald, who cried, from with-
out the lists, ' Let the brave combatants go /' After this,
it is true," concludes De Sully, " they fought without
mercy, and the vanquished, dead or alive, incurred all
the infamy of the crime and the punishment. He
was dragged upon a hurdle for some time and after-
ward hanged or burnt, while the other returned, hon-

22 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ored and triumphant, with a degree that attested him
to have gained his suit, and allotted him all manner
of satisfaction."

Judicial combats were prohibited in France by
Henry II., by an edict issued in 1547 — the death of
Francis de la Chastaignerie from injuries sustained at
the hands of Guy Chabot de Jarnac having greatly
affected the King, with whom the fallen Chastaignerie
had been a great favorite. Besides, the appeal to
high Heaven, as it were, was growing unpopular on
general principles; and combats upon points of
honor, as obscurely established by Philip le Bel, in
1308, were getting to be of every-day occurrence — no
less a personage than Francis I., who had been de-
feated and taken prisoner at Pavia, on February 24,
1525, having, in 1528, sent a challenge to the Emperor
Charles V., just before the Peace of Cambray. Henry
III. (who was murdered by a friar named Jaques Cle-
ment, on August i, 1589) made no effort during his
reign to check the growing evil, while the custom had
grown to involve seconds as well as principals; so
that, during the reign of Henry IV. — who issued
edict after edict against a custom " that had already
cost France," says some writer, " more gentle blood
than thirty years of civil war" — the dreadful mania
had swept away nearly twenty thousand valuable lives!
Louis XIII., however, beholding the gradual depopu-
lation of some provinces of their most illustrious per-
sonages, proceeded against the custom with unprece-
dented severity, and caused many wounded duellists
to be dragged violently from the so-called field of
honor to the scaffold of dishonor. This mode of
bloody and otherwise violent dealing, however, cre-
ated very little abatement; rivulets of gentle blood

DUELLING IN FRANCE. 23

still continued to murmur silently away; and it was
not until Louis XIV. attained his majority that an
impediment was successfully raised against the alarm-
ing mania — the movement having been the voluntary
compact of noblemen, and others of undoubted cour-
age and punctiliousness, to abstain from the bloody
practice. Louis XIV., perceiving the lull that had
taken place, created a court of chivalry in 1644 (the
members of which were the marshals of France),
which was to decide on all those questions of honor
which had formerly been settled permanently on san-
guinary fields. From that time until the present
there has been a general slacking off of the bloody
custom, and there is a law now in France making
killing in duels punishable as homicide, and permit-
ting civil action on the part of friends of persons
slain, while officers of the army and navy (and their
seconds) participating in duels may be cashiered.

Still, duelling in France has never received a quie-
tus: and never will, so long as army officers permit
private soldiers to meet in mortal combat and muti-
late each other with skewers; and so long as the fenc-
ing-schools of Paris may be counted by the score —
the flippant pen of " Mark Twain" to the contrary
notwithstanding. To be sure, Louis Veuillot humor-
ously declares that " amongst the amusements of
Paris must be counted duels between journalists."
He undoubtedly means that all such conflicts —
whether sanguinary or not — are amusing to the non-
combatants, just as it is fun for the boy who stones
the frogs. French army officers, who are not permit-
ted by law themselves to meet in mortal combat,
claim that it would be impossible to maintain disci-
pline and dignity in the army without from ten to

24 THE FIELD OF HONOR,

fifty skewer-duels per regiment annually among their
men. The skewer-duel is brought about and carried
on as follows: Two soldiers have a misunderstanding,
and possibly exchange sharp words; a non-commis-
sioned officer learns of the offence, and imprisons the
offender for twenty-four hours; then they are led
from durance vile, and furnished with seconds and
skewers; and, after having been stripped to the skin
of all their apparel but their shoes and trousers, they
are directed to thrust away at each other with said
implements of culinary use until one or the other is
wounded and the honor of each is satisfied. "If it
were not for the prospect of that pointed rapier be-
fore them," says some writer, " these soldiers might
sometimes kick and maul each other to death." As it
is, these duels do not infrequently terminate tragi-
cally.

Theodore Child, writing to the New York Sun
from Paris in December, 1882, after touching upon
the practice of duelling in the French army, says:

Among civilians duelling is defended on the ground that
generally it compensates for the insufficiency of legal justice.
This is, of course, a matter of opinion. I am not discussing :
I am simply explaining the French point of view, and ac-
counting for a phenomenon which we Anglo-Saxons are
inclined to look upon as a relic of barbarism. The duel, it
will be objected, does not give the offended party the means
of repairing the wrong that has been done him. Materially,
no ; morally, yes. Opinion has ordained that the single fact
of the combat washes away the offence. Evidently, if a man
were thirsting for vengeance, assassination would be a surer
means ; but precisely the equality of the danger and the loy-
alty of the combat give to the duel a color of chivalry which
prevents all but the most prejudiced minds from confound-
ing it with a criminal manoeuvre. The present French legis-

DUELLING IN FRANCE. 2$

lation has no special law against duelling; the duellist can
only be prosecuted as a murderer. The consequence is that
the authorities rarely or never interfere. Opinion has sanc-
tioned duelling, and, in spite of the edicts of Henry IV., of
Richelieu, of Louis XIV., in spite of the eloquent protesta-
tion of Jean Jacques Rousseau, and of the philosophers of
the eighteenth century, it continues to be, in France, an
important social institution. Just now there is a kind of
epidemic of duels in France. Every day in the week there
are meetings in the woods in the environs of Paris. The
combatants no longer cross the frontier as of old. In the
first place, the journey to the Belgian, German, or Spanish
frontier is costly; in the second place, a Parisian wit has
given out that if the combatants cross the frontier it is
because they count on the engagement being interrupted
by the gendarmes. Xhanks to the toleration of the police,
engagements may safely take place around Paris ; and not
long ago a large crowd witnessed a duel between two famous
fencing-masters — Pons, of Paris, and the Baron de San de
Mulato, of Naples. This duel took place on the race-course
at Vesinet. In point of fact, most of these encounters are
not very serious affairs. The journalists of Paris often fight
to get themselves and their papers talked about. For the
benefit of duellists of this class an ingenious formula has
been devised. An official report of every duel is forwarded
to all the newspapers and signed by the seconds ; in this
report it is stated that, after a combat of such and such
duration, one of the antagonists received a scratch, or worse ;
and the seconds, considering that the wound would render
the chances unequal, felt themselves called upon to terminate
the encounter and declare " honor to be satisfied." Never-
theless, the frequency of duels, from whatever motives, has
had the effect of causing a large part of the population of
France to frequent the fencing-rooms, for the fashion set
by Paris is followed in the provinces, and the provincial
journals also have their head-line, "Duels," like their Pa-
risian models. A new journal, called L'Escrzme, has been
founded under high patronage to meet this new want of

26 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

French society, and there exists a splendid volume, called
"The Men of the Sword," in which a Parisian expert in
matters of fencing (the Baron de Vaux) has analyzed the
form, the style, and the performance of the most famous con-
temporary swordsmen. In short, every man who respects
himself — every young fellow who pretends to be stylish —
must pass an hour or two every day in the fencing-rooms
under the orders of his trainer. The fencing-room is fash-
ionable ; and public opinion — or, rather, the opinion of so-
ciety under the Third Republic — is that the duel preserves
honor, reputation, and dignity. The fencing-rooms of Paris
are counted by the score, and the profession of fencing-
master is held in high honor. The most celebrated of the
guild is Vigeant, the gentleman-master, as he is called
by the Anglo-maniacs. Vigeant is a handsome young fellow
who affects the airs of Achilles in his sulking moods. He is
very touchy, reserved, and capricious. Some say he poses.
He lives in a handsome apartment in the second story at 91
Rue de Rennes. You ring, and the door is opened by a fine
muscular man, whom you at once recognize as a provost of
the profession. He introduces you into the cabinet of the
master. On the chimney-piece is a seventeenth-century
wood-engraving representing St. Michael, the patron saint
of fencers. By the side of this picture is another of Don
Quixote, sword in hand, gravely studying in some book of
chivalry thrusts that are no longer secret. In the corners
are rapiers of all kinds ; on the walls, engravings of fencing-
scenes; a full-length portrait of the master, by Carolus
Duran ; right and left two book-cases containing a unique
collection of everything that has been written on fencing for
the past three hundred years ; in the middle a table covered
with books, an inkstand, a pen, and a rapier. It is here that
Vigeant gives consultations on his art. Next in reputation
to Vigeant is Merignac, who rarely exhibits his skill in pub-
lic. Then, after these two stars, follow the lesser celebrities
— Mimiague, Rouleau, the brothers Robert, Cain, Gatechair,
Pellerin, Lautieri, and others. Furthermore, the millionaires
have their private fencing-rooms, one of the most splendid

DUELLING IN FRANCE. 2/

of which is that of M. Edmond Dollfus, in his mansion in
tlfie Rue Presbourg, where an assault at arms took place last
Sunday in presence of the Mite of Parisian high life. M.
Dollfus is also the President of the Fencing-Club. This
assault was a most imposing affair. The proces verbal of it,
printed in gold letters on parchment, and given to those
who took part in the tournament, is a beautiful work of art.
Drawn up in the style of the middle ages, this document
records the details of the different encounters, and thus
describes the managers of the tournament : " The Tribunal
of Arms that directed this historical festival of the noble
art of fencing, to wit : His Excellency the General of the
French Armies Verge, grand master; and Messieurs Mi-
miague et Pons's nephew, masters of arms of the first
class and nobles of the sword, chancellors, assisted in their
high and delicate functions as judges of the camp by H. E.
the high and puissant Monsignor Canrobert, Marshal of
the French armies ; by H. E. M. the Marquis de Alta-Villa
de la Puente, grand marshal of the court of her Majesty the
Queen-Mother Dona Isabel de Borbon y Borbon, Catholic,
Caesarian, and Imperial Majesty of the Spains and the Indies,
Lady of Biscay and Queen of Navarre; by H. E. M. the
Count Ferdinand de Lesseps, entitled the great Frenchman ;
by the sieur Legouve, member of the French Academy ; by
the noble and puissant signiors the Baron Antonio de
Ezpeleta, the Count Potocki, and G. de Borda, and by the
sieurs Wasckiewicz, Dollfus senior, and Paul Granier de
Cassagnac, also noble signiors." In the above extract
from this fantastic and aristocratic document will be found
some of the great names among the amateur swordsmen.
The five reputedly best amateurs are MM. Alfonso de Al-
dama, Ezpeleta, the Comte de Labenne, the Comte Linde-
mann, De Wa§ckiewicz, and De Ferry d'Esclands. Among
the journalists and poets who are famous fencers and du-
ellists may be mentioned Aurelien Scholl, Leon Chapron,
Henry Fouquier of the XIX. Siecle, the Baron Harden-
Hickey of the royalist journal Le Triboulet, Arthur Paul
de Cassagnac, Ranc, Jean Richepin, Albert de Saint-Albin

28 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

(Robert Milton of the Figaro), Rene Maizeroi, and Ar-
mand Silvestre. Among painters the finest blades are
Alfred Stevens and Carolus Duran. In Carolus Duran's
studio, in the Rue Notre Dame des Champs, the most con-
spicuous objects on the walls, besides the pictures and
sketches, are a mask, glove, and rapier, and a guitar.
Carolus is a very brilliant swordsman, of whom his master,
Vigeant, speaks only with respect. This celebrated artist,
with his swaggering gait, his lace sleeve-ruffles, his fine
voice, and his varied accomplishments, ought to have been
born in the sixteenth century. He is too picturesque for our
prosaic times. Alfred Stevens, too, is a man of the type of
the gallant knight of old. I need not say that fencing does
not hurt the talent of either of these excellent painters. For
that matter, they have illustrious predecessors who excelled
in the two arts. Raphael Sanzio was a first-class fencer.
Benvenuto Cellini, Velasquez, and Salvator Rosa handled
the sword in perfection ; and the Spaniard Ribera, who was
killed in a duel, was the most celebrated bravo of all the
Spains. In a list of Parisian duellists the names of Henri
Rochefort and Dr. Clemenceau must not be omitted. But
neither of these men is a fencer ; the latter is a dead shot
with the pistol ; the former is never wanting in pluck what-
ever be the weapon chosen. In the combats of the present
day the pistol is very rarely used. The fashionable weapon
is the rapier or the sabre. It is different from the days of
the famous Lord Seymour, when the gilded youth of Paris
found it necessary to be accomplished in the art of boxing,
single-stick, and the savate, a brutal art of kicking which is
to a Frenchman what fisticuffs are to an Anglo-Saxon. The
reader may, perhaps, remember that Eugene Sue, in his
" Mysteries of Paris," relates how Prince Rudolphe was able
to vanquish his enemies by his knowledge of^the manner in
which the lower classes settle their differences when they
refrain by mutual consent from using their knives. Those
were the days when the Due de Grammont-Caderousse and
his friends used to sup at Philippe's in the Rue Montorgueil,
and the natural conclusion to the carouse was a hand-^o-

DUELLING IN FRANCE. 2$

hand fight with the market porters. The polished youth
of to-day take no delight in such turbulent sports. Under
the direction of Saint-Michael, Don Quixote, and Master
Vigeant, the present duelling and fencing mania is as likely
as not to lead to a renaissance of chivalry. The French
under the Third Republic will have their tournaments and
courts of arms, their knights and nobles of the sword, to
correspond to the aesthetic eccentricities of their neighbors
across the Channel. There will then be a chance for "some
witty Tybalt with his pen prepared " to write a companion-
piece to "Patience" or the "Colonel," all bristling with
secret thrusts and full of the tac-tac and clashing of the
weapons of satire and ridicule.

Some of the famous French duellists have appeared
so often in the arena that their names are as familiar
(as doughty champions of the sword and pistol) in
the United States as in France. Of these are the
famous Paul de Cassagnac and Henri Rochefort.
Dr. Clemenceau is also a terror to his foe, as he is a
deadly expert with the pistol and no mean swords-
man. For anybody to meet Paul de Cassagnac is a sure
passport to the hospital or the grave — pretty much as
this leonine newspaper-man chooses to be merciless
or lenient. Rochefort is also a very effective duellist,
although he once showed his fear of the Imperialist
bully Cassagnac by declining to accept his challenge
except with the understanding that they should fight
with loaded pistols, breast to breast — a proposition
which partook of the profession of the butcher rather
than of the journalist, and which Paul very properly
declined. Fatal duels, however, are rare events nowa-
days in France, there having been but eight deaths
out of 545 duels fought since 1869.

30 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER II.

*

DUELLING IN ENGLAND.

Rise and Fall cf Judicial Duelling (or Trial by Wager of Battle)—
Mode of Combat — Statistics of Private Duelling — The Duke of
Hamilton and Lord Mohun — Lord Howard and the Duchess of
Shrewsbury — Colonel Fawcett and Captain Munroe — Lieuten-
ants Seton and Hawkey — Article of War against Duelling in the
British Army.

THE custom of Judicial Duelling (or Trial by Wager
of Battle) was introduced into England for accusa-
tions of treason (if neither the accused nor the accuser
could produce good evidence) during the reign of
William II., in 1096. Out of this custom grew a law
in England whereby a man charged with murder
might fight the appellant for the purpose of making
proof of his guilt or innocence. This law was upon
the English statute-book for two or three hundred
years, but was struck from off said statute-book
during the reign of George III., in 1819 — and on ac-
count of the following incident: In 1817 one Abraham
Thornton was charged with the murder of, a young
maid named Mary Ashford, and in an appeal claimed
his right by the "wager of battle" (the title of the
Act), which the court allowed; but the appellant (the
brother of the murdered girl) refused the challenge
(on account of his youth), and the accuser escaped all
punishment.

DUELLING IN ENGLAND. 3!

The first judicial duel ever fought in England — the
first battle by single combat — was that fought before
William II. and his peers between Geoffrey Baynard
and William, Earl of Eu. The latter had been ac-
cused of high treason by Baynard in 1096, and was
subsequently conquered in combat, and therefore
deemed convicted. This system was brought to an
end in 1631 by Charles I., who prevented a similar en-
counter between Lord Reay and David Ramsay.
One of the latest English episodes of the trial by bat-
tle took place during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, in
1571, in which the defendant in a civil case instituted
for the recovery of manorial rights in the Isle of Har-
tic, Kent, offered to maintain his right to possession
by the duel. This somewhat astonished the court;
but, as it admitted that it had no power of refusal,
the petitioners accepted the challenge, champions
were appointed, and the proper arrangements forth-
with made perfect for the judicial combat; and, al-
though an edict had been issued by the Queen (who
wished to see no bloodshed) that the parties compro-
mise, as a matter of justice to the defendant, who had
demanded the battle, and to maintain the authority
of the law, it was decided that the duel must be per-
mitted to proceed. This was the last judicial combat
in England in a civil case, although one occurred in
a court of chivalry in 1631, and a similar one still la-
ter, in 1638.

Like the judicial duel in France, the form and man-
ner of waging battle upon appeal in England were
characterized by remarkable ceremonious proceeding,
while the oaths of the two combatants were vastly
more striking and solemn. The appellee, when ap-
pealed of felony, pleaded "Not guilty," and threw

32 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

down his glove and declared that he would defend
the same by his body. The appellant then took up
the glove and replied that he was ready to make good
the appeal, body for body. And thereupon the ap-
pellee took the Bible in his right hand, and in his
left the right hand of his antagonist, and swore as
follows: " Hear this, O man, whom I hold by the
hand, who callest thyself John by the name of bap-
tism, that I, who call myself Thomas by the name of
baptism, did not feloniously murder thy father, Wil-
liam by name, nor am any way guilty of the said
felony; so help me God and the saints; and this I
will defend against thee by my body, as this court
shall award." To which the appellant replies, hold-
ing the Bible and his antagonist's hand in the same
manner as the other: "Hear this, O man whom I
hold by the hand, who callest thyself Thomas by
name of baptism, that thou art perjured; and there-
fore perjured because that thou feloniously didst
murder my father, William by name; so help me
God and the saints; and this I will prove against
thee by my body, as this court shall award." A day
is then set for the battle, arms selected (batons), and
the same oaths administered as in French courts
against the use of amulets and sorcery. In the com-
bat, " if the appellee be so far vanquished that he
cannot or will not fight any longer, he shall be ad-
judged to be hanged immediately; and then, as well
as if he be killed in battle, Providence is deemed to
have determined in favor of the truth, and his blood
shall be attainted. But if he kills the appellant, or
can maintain the fight from sun-rising till the stars
appear in the evening, he shall be acquitted. So,
also, if the appellant becomes recreant, and pro-

DUELLING IN ENGLAND. 33

nounces the horrible word craven (which means that
he craves or begs for his life from his antagonist), he
shall lose his liberam legem (that is, he shall lose his
right of law), and become infamous; and the appellee
shall recover his damages, and also be forever quit,
not only of the appeal, but of all indictments likewise
for the same offence."

The following is taken from " Cobbett's 'Complete
Collection of State Trials" (vol. iii., p. 515), .pub-
lished in London in 1809, and has reference to the
manner of combat: "And forthwith there shall be an
oyez or proclamation made, that none shall be so bold
but the combatants to speak or do anything that
shall disturb the battle: and whosoever shall do
against this proclamation shall suffer imprisonment
for a year and a day. Then they shall fight with
weapons, but not with any iron, but with two staves
or bastons tipt with horn, of an ell long, both of
equal length, and each of them a target, and with no
other weapon may they enter the lists. And if the
defendant can defend himself till after sunset, till you
may see the stars in the firmanent, and demand
judgment if he ought to fight any longer, then there
must be judgment given on the defendant's side."

Verstegan, the antiquary, in his curious book en-
titled " Restitution of Decayed Intelligence in An-
tiquities concerning the Most Noble and Renowned
English Nation," says: "In the trial by single com-
bat, or camp-fight, the accuser was with the peril of
his own body to prove the accused guilty, and, by
offering him his glove, to challenge him to this trial:
the which the other must either accept of or else ac-
knowledge himself culpable of the crime whereof he
was accused. If it were a crime deserving death,

34 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

then was the camp-fight for life and death, and either
on horseback or on foot. If the offence deserved im-
prisonment and not death, then was the camp-fight
accomplished when the one had subdued the other,
by making him to yield, or unable to defend himself,
and so be taken prisoner. The accused had the lib-
erty to choose another in his stead, but the accuser
must perform it in his own person, and with equality
of weapon. The priests and people that were specta-
tors did silently pray that the victory might fall unto
the guiltless. And if the fight were for life or death,
a bier stood ready to carry away the dead, body of
him that should be slain. None of the people might
cry, shriek out, make any noise, or give any sign
whatsoever; as the executioner stood beside the
judges, ready with an axe to cut off the right hand
and left foot of the party so offending. He that (be-
ing wounded) did yield himself was at the mercy of
the other, to be killed or to be let live. If he were
slain, then was he carried away and honorably buried;
and he that slew him reputed more honorable than
before. But if, being overcome, he were left alive,
then was he by sentence of the judges declared utter-
ly void of all honest reputation, and never to ride on
horseback nor carry arms."

[If the reader wishes to inform himself very fully
upon this subject, he may consult Lord Coke's 3d
Inst., c. 2, p. 26; also Blackstone's Comm., b. iv., c.
19, §4, and c. 27, §3; also " Cobbett s Complete Col-
lection of State Trials," vol. iii., pp. 483, 511, and
518; also an account of the "Trial by Battle from
Minshew's Dictionary."]

Duelling did not prevail as a custom in England
until late during the reign of Queen Elizabeth; at

DUELLING IN ENGLAND. 35

which period Vincentio Saviolo, a little Italian fenc-
ing-teacher of violent temper and affected punctil-
iousness, published a small volume entitled " A
Treatise of Honor," which was at once adopted
(1594) by certain parties as a standard work of refer-
ence in cases of " honor involved." From 1594 until
1713 much precious blood was spilled in England,
Scotland, and Ireland upon " fields of honor," most of
the combats during that time having been carried on
by the use of small swords, which had been intro-
duced into England in 1587. But the fatal duel be-
tween the Duke of Hamilton and Lord Mohun
(which was fought with small swords in Hyde Park
on November 15, 1712, and in which the latter was
killed on the spot, while the Duke expired of his
wounds as he was being conveyed to his carriage)
created much sensation throughout England, and an
attempt was made in the House of Commons a short
time afterward to enact a bill for the suppression of
duelling, which 'was an effective entering wedge,
although the bill was lost on the third reading.
From that time, however, until the present, con-*-
tinued efforts have been made in England to constitute
duelling an offence; and in 1679 Charles II. issued a
proclamation that any person killing another in a
duel should be held for trial, and upon conviction
should not be pardoned — and yet, during this
Charles's reign (from May 29, 1660, to February 6,
1685), there took place 196 duels, in which 75 per-
sons were killed and 108 wounded, upon English soil.
Indeed, duelling was carried to its greatest possible
excess during the reigns of James I. and the two
Charleses; and in the reign of the latter the seconds
always fought as well as the principals — in fact the

36 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

latter generally selected their seconds with regard to
their courage and adroitness.

It was during the reign of Charles II. that Lord
Howard, of Carlisle, gave a grand fete-champetre at
Spring Gardens, near the village of Charing — the
Vauxhall of that day. This fete was to facilitate an
intrigue between Lord Howard and the profligate
Duchess of Shrewsbury; but the gay and fascinating
Sidney flirted with the Duchess, abstracted her atten-
tion from Howard, and ridiculed the festivities.
Early on the following day, Howard sent a challenge
to Sidney, who chose as his second a young giant
named Dillon, — a noted furious and adroit swordsman,
— while his Lordship selected a young gentleman
named Rawlings, who had just come into possession
of an estate with an income of ^10,000 a year. Sid-
ney received three serious thrusts from Howard, and
was taken from the field dangerously wounded,
whilst his second was run through the heart and left
dead in his tracks. Upon the receipt of this news the
Duke of Shrewsbury became greatly excited, and
challenged the infamous Buckingham for intriguing
with his wife. The challenge was, of course, accepted,
and the Duchess, disguised as a page, accompanied
Buckingham to the field, and held his horse while he
fought and killed her husband. The slaying of
Shrewsbury was characterized as a cold-blooded mur-
der; still, the King, in spite of every remonstrance
from the Queen, received Buckingham with open
arms a short time after this brutal outrage.

In 172 duels fought in England during a stated
period, 69 persons were killed (in three, neither of
the combatants survived); 96 persons were wounded,
' — 48 desperately and 48 slightly, — and 188 escaped

DUELLING IN ENGLAND. $?

unhurt. Thus, rather more than one fifth lost their
lives, and nearly one half received the bullets or
thrusts of their antagonists. It appears, also, that,
out of this number of duels, eighteen trials took
place; six of the arraigned were acquitted, seven were
found guilty of manslaughter, and three of murder;
two were executed, and eight were imprisoned for
different periods.

The custom was checked in the army in 1792, dur-
ing the reign of George III., but received its severest
check in the army and navy of Great Britain in 1844,
by an article of war which rendered duelling an
offence punishable by cashiering: and which was
urged through Parliament on account of the san-
guinary meeting of Colonel Fawcett and Captain
Munroe (at which the former was killed), July i,
1843. On May 20, 1845, however, two army officers
(Lieutenant Seton and Lieutenant Hawkey) met in
hostile encounter, and the former was killed. This
tragic affair produced a renewed opposition to the
custom, and a society " for the discouraging of duel-
ling" was at once established; and since that time, on
account of the influence of public opinion and the
terrors of the law, the practice of duelling in Eng-
land may be said to have almost wholly ceased to
exist. The following is the article of war referred to
for the repression of duelling in the armies of Great
Britain (and there are other laws of a similar char-
acter) :

" Every officer who shall give or send a challenge,
or who shall accept any challenge, to fight a duel with
another officer, or who, being privy to an intention to
fight a duel, shall not take active measures to prevent
such duel, or who shall upbraid each other for refus-

38 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ing, or for not giving, a challenge, or who shall
reject, or advise the rejection of, a reasonable propo-
sition made for the honorable adjustment of a diffi-
culty, shall be liable, if convicted before a general
court-martial, to be cashiered, or suffer such other
punishment as the court may award."

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 39

CHAPTER III.
DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND.

The Irish and Scotch Passion for Duelling — Qualifications of
Irish Respectability: "What Family is he of? Did he ever
blaze ?" — Sir Jonah Barrington's Felicity — How Two Irishmen
met Two Gentlemen from London — Melancholy and Furious
Encounters in Scotland — The Troubles of a Royal Husband —
The Law of Combat by the Best Authorities—A Codification
that covers Delicate Questions.

THE Emerald Isle may be said to be dotted all
over with " fields of honor," so thick and fast and
furious have been the deadly encounters among the
"wearers of the green;" particularly during the days
of the old Parliament in College Green, Dublin, at
which time it was deemed not injudicious for the as-
piring barrister to purchase a case of pistols and the
necessary law-books at the same time. Indeed, it
is related of Hutchinson, the Provost of Trinity Col-
lege (himself a noted duellist), that, when a certain
student approached him with importunities regard-
ing a course of legal study, he directed the young
aspirant to buy a case of pistols and to learn their
use; "as," added Hutchinson, "they will get you
along faster than Fearne or Blackstone." This was
literally "teaching the young idea how to shoot."
O'Connell, Curran, Grattan, McNamara, Castlereagh,
Sheridan, Barrington, Fitzgibbon, Flood, O'Brien,

4O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

O'Gorman, and many other Irishmen of note, have
all fought within the lists.

Judicial duelling was established in Ireland in the
year noo, and flourished until 1631, during which time
many sanguinary combats occurred; one of the most
remarkable, as well as one of the most tragic, having
been that which took place in 1533, at Dublin Castle,
before the lords justices and council, between Connor
MacCormack O'Connor and Teig MacGilpatrick
O'Connor, in which the former was severely wounded
many times, and was ultimately despatched and had
his head cut off and presented to the lords justices by
the victorious Teig. It was after the degeneracy of the
judicial duel, however, that the custom in Ireland took
on its most desperate shape, and became popular as
an institution; and it was long after its general de-
cline in England that lovers of duelling in Ireland
grudgingly relinquished their fondness for a custom
that had brought into the field so many intrepid fel-
lows and capital shots. It has been stated by
some writer on the subject that no duels are palat-
able to both parties except those that are engaged in
from motives of revenge. From a general stand-
point this is undoubtedly true; and your Irish duel-
list was seldom an exception. But one of the greatest
and most distinguished of all the Irish fighters (Cur-
ran) was probably the least ferocious, at least after
the preliminaries of combat had been perfectly ar-
ranged. Curran's charming impudence and humor
never abandoned him — he may have met Hobart,
Fitzgibbon, and Burrowes with hostility in his eye,
but he must also have met them with a smile upon his
lips. When the second of Peter Burrowes stated to
Curran's second that his principal was in a very feeble

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 41

condition, and wanted to be allowed to lean against
a milestone during the exchange of shots; and Cur-
ran, after listening to the invalid's ingenuous request,
responded, " Certainly, provided I am allowed to
lean against the next milestone," there must have
been twinkles in his eyes as well as smiles at his lips.
At the present time duelling is at a great discount in
Ireland, and the laws against the custom are pretty
rigidly enforced.

Sir Jonah Harrington, Judge of the High Court of
Admiralty in Ireland (a noted duellist in his day), in
his " Personal Sketches of his Own Times," devotes
two chapters to Irish duellists and duelling, and says
that " Single combat was formerly a very prevalent
and favorite mode of administering justice in Ireland;
and not being considered so brutal as bull-fights, or
other beastly amusements of that nature, it was au-
thorized by law, and frequently performed before the
high authorities and their ladies — bishops, judges,
and other persons of high office generally honoring
the spectacle with their presence. Two hundred and
twenty-seven memorable and official duels have actu-
ally been fought during my grand climacteric. . . .
In my time the number of killed and wounded among
the bar was very considerable. It is, in fact, incredible
what a singular passion the Irish gentlemen (though
in general excellent-tempered fellows) formerly had
for fighting each other and immediately making
friends again. A duel was, indeed, considered a
necessary part of a young man's education, but by no
means a ground for future animosity with his oppo-
nent. . . . When men had a glowing ambition to ex-
cel in all manner of feats and exercises they naturally
conceived that manslaughter, in an honest way (that

42 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

is, not knowing which would be slaughtered), was the
most chivalrous and gentlemanly of all their accom-
plishments. No young fellow could finish his educa-
tion till he had exchanged shots with some of his
acquaintances. . . . The two first questions always
asked as to a young man's respectability and qualifi-
cations, particularly when he proposed for a lady
wife, were, 'What family is he of?' and 'Did he
ever blaze?' . . . Tipperary and Galway were the
ablest schools of the duelling science. Galway was
most scientific at the sword, and Tipperary most
practical and prized at the pistol; Mayo not amiss at
either, while Roscommon and Sligo had many pro-
fessors and a high reputation in the leaden branch of
the pastime. . . . Our elections were more prolific
in duels than any other public meetings; they very
seldom originated at a horse-race, hunt, or any place
of amusement. ... I think I may challenge any
country in Europe to show such an assemblage of
gallant judicial and official antagonists at fire and
sword as is exhibited in the following partial list:
The Lord Chancellor of Ireland, Lord Clare, fought
the Master of the Rolls, Curran. The Chief-Justice
K. B., Lord Clonmel, fought Lord Tyrawly (a Privy
Councillor), Lord Llandoff, and two others. The
judge of the county of Dublin, Egan, fought the
Master of the Rolls, Roger Barrett, and three others.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right Honor-
able Isaac Corry, fought the Right Honorable Henry
Grattan (a Privy Councillor) and another. A Baron
of the Exchequer, Baron Medge, fought his brother-
in-law and two others. The Chief-Justice C. P., Lord
Norbury, fought Fire-eater Fitzgerald and two other
gentleman, and frightened Napper Tandy and seve-

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 43

ra. besides. The judge of the Prerogative Court,
Dr. Duigenan, fought one barrister and frightened
another on the ground. The Chief Counsel to the
Revenue, Henry Deane Grady, fought Counsellor
O'Mahon, Counsellor Campbell, and others. The
Master of the Rolls, Curran, fought Lord Bucking-
hamshire, the Chief Secretary. The Provost of the
University of Dublin, the Right Honorable Hely
Hutchinson, fought Mr. Doyle, Master in Chancery,
and some others. The Chief-Justice C. P. Patter-
son fought three country gentlemen, one of them
with swords and the others with guns, and wounded
all of them. The Right Honorable George Ogle (a
Privy Councillor), fought Barney Coyle (a distiller),
because he was a papist. Thomas Wallace, K.C.,
fought Mr. O'Gorman, the Catholic Secretary. The
Collector of Customs of Dublin, the Honorable Fran-
cis Hutchinson, fought the Right Honorable Lord
Mountmorris. The reader of this dignified list will
surely see no great indecorum in an admiralty judge
having now and then exchanged broadsides, more es-
pecially as they did not militate against the law of
nations."

In the reign of Queen Anne party spirit ran very
high, particularly in the city of Dublin, where duels
were fought almost daily on account of politics. Two
gentlemen of London — Major Park and Captain Creed
— who valued themselves highly on their skill in
fencing, hearing of the frequency of "affairs of honor"
in Dublin, like true knights-errant, resolved to go
there in quest of adventures. On inquiry they learned
that Mr. Mathew, of Thomastown, in Tipperary, who
had recently arrived from France, had the character
of being one of the finest swordsmen in Europe.

44 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Park, rejoicing to find a worthy antagonist, resolved,
on the first opportunity, to have a trial of skill with
him. This was soon the case, and the parties met at
a tavern, Mathew accompanied by a Mr. Macnamara,
and Major Park attended by his friend Creed. The
doors being secured, Park and Mathew, without par-
ley or explanation, drew their swords; but Macna-
mara stopped them and said that it was impossible
for him, in cases of such a nature, to remain a cool
spectator; and then, addressing himself to Captain
Creed, continued: "If you please, sir, I shall have the
honor of entertaining you in the same manner."
Creed, who desired nothing better, replied by drawing
his sword, and at it the four champions went. The
conflict was of long duration, and was maintained
with remarkable skill and obstinacy by the two offi-
cers, notwithstanding the great effusion of blood from
the many wounds they had received. At length,
completely exhausted, they both fell, and yielded the
victory to the superior skill of their antagonists.
The number of wounds received by the vanquished
parties was very great; and, what seems almost mi-
raculous, their opponents were untouched. The sur-
geons, who were at once called, seeing the desperate
state of their patients, would not suffer them to be
removed from the room in which they had , fought,
but had beds immediately taken into it, on which the
two wounded officers lay many hours in a state of
danger and insensibility. When they were able to see
visitors, Mathew and Macnamara called and attended
them daily; and a close friendship and intimacy after-
ward ensued, as they found their fallen antagonists
gentlemen of strict honor and integrity, and of the
best dispositions, except in their Quixotish fondness

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 45

for duelling, of which they had, however, become
completely cured.

Scotland never took the same popular interest in
duelling as its impetuous neighbor; and, as early as
1580, although licenses for mortal combats could be
.obtained from the Crown, the killing of a person in a
duel without a license could be called murder. Judi-
cial duelling was introduced into Scotland about the
year noo, and flourished for over five hundred years.
When the character of the laws against duelling in
Scotland is considered, it is readily understood why
the custom did not prevail to the same popular ex-
tent among the Scots as among their more roistering
neighbors; for when a duel took place upon a chal-
lenge in Scotland and was followed by the death of
one of the parties, the survivor was charged with mur-
der, however fair and equal the combat may have
been conducted; and the better to repress such irregu-
larities, the legislature, by the statute of 1600, raised
the bare act of engaging in a duel to the same rank
of a capital crime as the actual slaughter, without
distinguishing whether any of the parties did or did
not suffer any wound or material harm on the occa-
sion; and, to complete the restraint, it was by the
statute of 1696 made punishable with banishment and
escheat of movables to be concerned in the giving,
sending, or accepting a challenge, even though no
combat should ensue.

Still, the same difficulty was experienced in the
total abolishment of the custom in Scotland as in
some other countries; and few duels have been ac-
companied with more melancholy circumstances than
one fought near Edinburgh, in 1790, between Sir
George Ramsay and Captain Macrae, which origi-

46 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

nate in the following seemingly trivial circumstance:
A servant of Sir George, keeping a chair at the door
of the Edinburgh Theatre, was directed by Captain
Macrae to remove it; and, upon his declining to do so,
words ensued, and the fracas was ended by a severe
chastisement of the servant at the hands of the en-
raged officer. Meeting next day with Sir George,
Macrae insisted upon the dismissal of the servant
from his service, which was politely refused on the
ground that, whatever may have been the nature of
the offence, the offender had already received suffi-
cient punishment. A challenge was the immediate
consequence, and the parties met on Musselburgh
Links, Sir George accompanied by Sir William Max-
well, and Macrae by Captain Hay. The former fired
first, but without effect. Captain Macrae returned
the fire, and lodged his bullet near the heart of his
antagonist. Sir George languished a few days in
great agony, when he expired. The poor fellow on
whose account this duel happened no sooner heard of
his master's death than he fell into convulsions and
died in three hours; and Captain Macrae at once fled
the country.

The following story illustrates the fighting qualities
of the Scotch, In the year 1396 a cruel feud existed
between the Clan Chattan and the Clan Kay, which
Robert III. had vainly endeavored to reconcile. At
length the Earls of Crawford and Dunbar proposed
that the differences should be determined by the
sword, by thirty champions upon each side. The war-
riors were speedily selected, the day of combat fixed,
the field chosen, and the King and his nobility assem-
bled as spectators. On reviewing the combatants it

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 47

was found that one of the Clan Chattan was missing,
when it was proposed that one of the Clan Kay should
withdraw; but such was the spirit of these brave
fellows that not one could be prevailed upon to re-
sign the honor of the day. At length a saddler named
Wild, who happened accidentally to be present,
offered to supply the place of the missing Mackintosh,
and was accepted. The combat was at once com-
menced, and by the prowess of Wild victory declared
itself in favor of the champions with whom he fought.
Of the Clan Chattan only ten and the volunteer were
left alive, and all were dangerously wounded; while
of the Clan Kay only one survived, who, after declin-
ing either to surrender or to proceed further in so un-
equal a contest, threw himself into the Tay and swam
across. This combat has been immortalized by Sir
Walter Scott, in his novel, "The Fair Maid of Perth."

During the civil wars Sir Ewan Lochiel, while Chief
of the Clan Cameron, sent a challenge to Colonel Pel-
lew, an English officer, who accepted it and named
swords as weapons. The fight took place the follow-
ing day; and, after two hours' combat, Lochiel dis-
armed the Englishman, the sword of the latter flying
nearly twenty feet into the air. They then clinched,
and wrestled more than half an hour, when they fell
together, Lochiel underneath. The latter, although
the smaller and weaker of the two, managed to fasten
his teeth into the throat of his antagonist, and tore
away several ounces of flesh, which he held in his
mouth like a wild beast until he left the field: and
to his dying day Sir Ewan declared that it was the
sweetest morsel he had ever tasted in his life.

In 1567 a great commotion was produced in Scot-

4 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

land on account of the cnarge of Lord Herries that
Morton and Maitland were the murderers of Lord
Darnley, the husband of Queen Mary. This charge
elicited a challenge to Lord Herries from Lord Lind-
say, who declined, however, to meet only those whom
he had accused. Morton and Maitland and two
brothers named Murray subsequently accused the
Duke of Orkney, James Hepburn Bothwell (the one
whom Mary, afterward married), as the real murderer
of Darnley; who, in turn, challenged all gentlemen of
honorable standing who accused him of the murder
of the former husband of the Queen, or who believed
him to have been in any way whatever a participant
in the crime; and claimed, further, that his trial and
acquittal should be accepted as conclusive evidence
regarding his innocence. No person of rank took
notice of this general challenge; and, at last, while at
the head of the army — so constant was the annoyance
from his adversaries — Bothwell published a cartel of
defiance (calling upon many of his prominent enemies
by name), and offered to prove his innocence by
wager of battle. This brought out a score or more of
gallant men of acknowledged rank, and among them
Lords Morton and Lindsay, who elected to fight
with two-handed swords. The Queen, however, inter-
fered, and commanded tranquillity; and so the guilty
Bothwell was spared from the weapons of scores of
enraged swordsmen of Grange and Tullibarden, who
were only too willing to take a hand in sending the
Duke to his final account.

The Irish code duello — from which all other codes
(in the English language) have been written or made
/'with modifications suited to the times and coun-

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 49

tries or persons who have adopted it) — was adopted
at the Clonmel Summer Assizes, 1777, for the gov-
ernment of duellists, by the gentlemen of Tipperary,
Galway, Mayo, Sligo, and Roscommon, and pre-
scribed for general adoption throughout Ireland.
" These rules," says Sir Jonah Harrington, " brought
the whole business of duelling to a focus, and have
been much acted upon down to the present day."
They were, in Galway, called the twenty-six com-
mandments, and are as follows:

RULE I. — The first offence requires the first apol-
ogy, though the retort may have been more offensive
than the insult. Example : A tells B he is imperti-
nent, etc. B retorts that he lies ; yet A must make
the first apology, because he gave the first offence,
and (after one fire) B may explain away the retort
by subsequent apology.

RULE II. — But if the parties would rather fight on,
then, after two shots each (but in no case before), B
may explain first and A apologize afterward.

N. B. — The above rules apply to all cases of
offences in retort not of a stronger class than the ex-
ample.

RULE III. — If a doubt exists who gave the first
offence, the decision rests with the seconds. If they
will not decide or cannot agree, the matter must
proceed to two shots, or to a hit if the challenger re-
quires it.

RULE IV. — When the lie direct is the first offence,
the aggressor must either beg pardon in express
terms, exchange two shots previous to apology, or
three shots followed by explanation, or fire on till a
severe hit be received by one party or the other.

SO THE FIELD OF HONOR.

RULE V. — As a blow is strictly prohibited under
any circumstances among gentlemen, no verbal
apology can be received for such an insult. The
alternatives, therefore, are: The offender handing a
cane to the injured party to be used on his back, at
the same time begging pardon; firing until one or
both are disabled; or exchanging three shots and
then begging pardon without the proffer of the
cane.

N. B. — If swords are used, the parties engage until
one is well blooded, disabled, or disarmed, or until,
after receiving a wound and blood being drawn, the
aggressor begs pardon.

RULE VI. — If A gives B the lie and B retorts by a
blow (being the two greatest offences), no reconcilia-
tion can take place till after two discharges each or
a severe hit, after which B may beg A's pardon for
the blow, and then A may explain simply for the lie,
because a blow is never allowable, and the offence
of the lie, therefore, merges in it. (See preceding
rule.)

N. B. — Challenges for undivulged causes may be
conciliated on the ground after one shot. An expla-
nation or the slightest hit should be sufficient in such
cases, because no personal offence transpired.

RULE VII. — But no apology can be received in any
case after the parties have actually taken their
ground without exchange of shots.

RULE VIII. — In the above case no challenger is
obliged to divulge his cause of challenge (if private)
unless required by the challenged so to do before
their meeting.

RULE IX. — All imputations of cheating at play,

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 5 1

races, etc., to be considered equivalent to a blow,
but may be reconciled after one shot, on admitting
their falsehood and begging pardon publicly.

RULE X. — Any insult to a lady under a gentleman's
care or protection to be considered as by one degree
a greater offence than if given to the gentleman per-
sonally, and to be regarded accordingly.

RULE XI. — Offences originating or accruing from
the support of ladies' reputation to be considered as
less unjustifiable than any others of the same class,
and as admitting of slighter apologies by the
aggressor. This is to be determined by the circum-
stances of the case, but always favorably to the lady.

RULE XII. — No dumb firing or firing in the air is
admissible in any case. The challenger ought not
to have challenged without receiving offence, and
the challenged ought, if he gave offence, to have
made an apology before he came on the ground;
therefore children's play must be dishonorable on
one side or the other, and is accordingly prohibited.

RULE XIII. — Seconds to be of equal rank in society
with the principals they attend, inasmuch as a second
may either choose or chance to become a principal,
and equality is indispensable.

RULE XIV. — Challenges are never to be delivered
at night, unless the party to be challenged intends
leaving the place of offence before morning; for it
is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.

RULE XV. — The challenged has the right to choose
his own weapons unless the challenger gives his
honor he is no swordsman, after which, however, he
cannot decline any second species of weapon 'pro-
posed by the challenged.

52 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

RULE XVI. — The challenged chooses his ground,
the challenger chooses his distance, the seconds fix
the time and terms of firing.

RULE XVII. — The seconds load in presence of each
other, unless they give their mutual honors that they
have charged smooth and single, which shall be held
sufficient.

RULE XVIII. — Firing may be regulated, first, by
signal; secondly, by word of command; or, thirdly, at
pleasure, as may be agreeable to the parties. In the
latter case the parties may fire at their reasonable
leisure, but second presents and rests are strictly pro-
hibited.

RULE XIX.. — In all cases a misfire is equivalent to
a shot, and a snap or a non-cock is to be considered
as a misfire.

RULE XX. — Seconds are bound to attempt a recon-
ciliation before the meeting takes place, or after suffi-
cient firing or hits as specified.

RULE XXI. — Any wound sufficient to agitate the
nerves and necessarily make the hand shake must
end the business for that day.

RULE XXII. —If the cause of meeting be of such a
nature that no apology or explanation can or will be
received, the challenged takes his ground and calls
on the challenger to proceed as he chooses. In such
cases firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may
be varied by agreement.

RULE XXIII. — In slight cases the second hands his
principal but one pistol, but in gross cases two, hold-
ing another case ready charged in reserve.

RULE XXIV. — When the seconds disagree and re-
solve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the

DUELLING IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND. 53

same time and at right angles with their principals,
thus:

s

If with swords, side by side, with five paces' interval.

RULE XXV. — No party can be allowed to bend his
knee or cover his side with his left hand, but may
present at any level from the hip to the eye.

RULE XXVI. — None can either advance or retreat
if the ground is measured. If no ground be mea-
sured, either party may advance at his pleasure, even
to the touch of muzzles, but neither can advance on
his adversary after the fire, unless the adversary steps
forward on him.

N.B. — The seconds on both sides stand responsible
for this last rule being strictly observed, bad cases
having occurred from neglecting it.

N.B. — All matters and doubts not herein men-
tioned will be explained and cleared up by applica-
tion to the Committee, who meet alternately at
Clonmel and Galway at the quarter sessions for that
purpose.

CROW RYAN, President.

JAMES KEOGH, AMBY BODKIN, Secretaries.

54 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER IV.
DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES.

Anecdote of Frederick the Great — The so-called " University
Duel " — How an American Student gave Three German Youths
Satisfaction — Fatal Effect of forcing a Fight upon an American
Student — Challenging the Wrong Englishman — Twenty-one
Duels in One Day — A Romantic Event and the Causes which
led to it — An American Boy's Description of a German-Student
Duel — Duelling Elsewhere in Europe — Anecdote of Gustavus
Adolphus of Sweden — Potemkin and Orliff — Heckeren and
Pouchkin.

THE judicial duel was known in Germany early in
600, and had its rise and fall in pretty much the same
manner as has been presented in descriptions of its
rise and fall in those countries heretofore mentioned.
The private duel, however, did not follow with the
vim which characterized its introduction into Eng-
land and France; and, if an exception is made of the
so-called " university duel," the custom of giving
and accepting challenges in German countries has
never been cordially recognized as a popular institu-
tion.

Germany is indebted to many of its monarchs for
this state of affairs, and especially to Joseph II., who,
in August, 1771, wrote as follows to a commanding
officer: — "General: I desire you to arrest Count K.
and Captain W. immediately. The Count is of an

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 55

imperious character, proud of his high birth, and full
of false ideas of honor. Captain W., who is an old
soldier, thinks of settling everything by the sword or
the pistol. He has done wrong to accept a challenge
from the young Count. I will not suffer the practice
of duelling in my army, and I despise the arguments
of those who seek to justify it. I have a high esteem
for officers who expose themselves courageously to
the enemy, and who, on all occasions, show them-
selves intrepid, valiant, and determined in attack as
well as in defence. The indifference with which they
face death is honorable to themselves and useful to
their country; but there are men ready to sacrifice
everything to a spirit of revenge and hatred. Let a
council of war be summoned to try these two officers
with all the impartiality which I demand from every
judge, and let the most culpable of the two be made
an example by the rigor of the law. There will still
be left men who can unite bravery with the duties of
faithful subjects. I wish for none who do not respect
the laws of their country."

An anecdote has been related of Frederick the
Great, <3f Prussia, which accounts in a vividly dra-
matic way for the unpopularity of the custom in that
country at the very time when duelling in England
and France was carried to murderous extremes, and
where every private resentment was permanently
settled at the point of the sword. No greater enemy
to the custom ever sat upon a throne than Frederick;
and, at one time during his reign, believing that duel-
ling was on the increase in his army, he made up his
iron mind to put a stop to it. So he issued an order
that the first party engaging in a duel without his
consent should be summarily punished. A very

56 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

short time after the publication of this order an offi-
cer of good rank sought his Majesty's presence and
asked for permission to challenge a brother-officer to
mortal combat; to which Frederick gave his gracious
consent, provided that his Majesty should be notified
beforehand of the time and place where the duel was
to be fought. At the time appointed for the arrival
upon the ground of the belligerents all parties
promptly appeared; and, to their amazement, there
sat Frederick near a gibbet that had been newly
erected upon the spot; and the longer the parties
gazed upon the scene the greater became their con-
sternation; until the challenger, at last, in great em-
barrassment, appealed respectfully to his king to
know the meaning of the spectacle, who replied as
follows: "It means, sir, that I intend to witness your
battle until one of you has killed the other, and
then I will hang the survivor!" It is hardly neces-
sary to add that the proposed duel was not fought;
and that, henceforth, duelling was a rare event in the
Prussian army. The new code of Prussia contains
severe provisions against duelling and the sending of
challenges.

Regarding what is termed the "university duel,"
the most that can be said against it is that it is ridicu-
lous, although there is scarcely a German of promi-
nence whose face does not bear witness to encounters
of this sort; and these reminiscences of student-days
may be seen engraven upon the faces of judges and
senators and advocates, the same as upon officers of
the army. It is understood that there must be just
about so much fighting, and therefore challenges are
given and accepted every day. The duels at the capi-
tal take place at a garden three miles out of Berlin,

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 57

in an arena or hall, fifty by thirty feet. Sometimes
the place is crowded with students, nearly every one
of whom displays " tokens of battle" either upon the
face or head. It is not uncommon to see an array of
false noses .where real ones used to be, or a face cov-
ered with scars, and a head minus an ear. These
losses and patchworks of skull and face are consid-
ered honorable, and the greatest possible display is
made of them. An eye-witness of one of these en-
counters lately wrote a description of it to the Phila-
delphia Times, which is presented. " A duel was on
the tapis as we entered. Two young men sat in
chairs facing each other, the right arm, neck, and
breast of each protected by heavy pads of quilted
canvas, so heavy as to make those parts proof
against any stroke of the sword. Each wore heavy
iron goggles to protect the eyes, and all vital parts
were protected so as to make dangerous wounds im-
possible, or nearly so. The rapiers, or swords, are
about three and a half feet in length, sharpened
about a foot from the end, but not pointed. At the
word the swords were crossed with a ringing cling,
and at another word the fight commenced. It was
cut and parry, and parry and cut; the blows falling
on head and arm or breast with amazing rapidity.
But for the absurd padding and the ludicrous gog-
gles the spectacle would have been a very pretty one.
But without goggles and padding serious wounding
would have followed, and that was not desired. Af-
ter a few minutes of slashing and parrying, a red
streak showed upon the forehead of one of them, and
a halt was called. The surgeon examined the wound,
sponged it, and pronounced it only a scratch. The
faces of both were then sponged by their seconds,

$8 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and at it they went again. Other wounds were given
and taken till blood flowed from each in streams.
But the fight continues a fixed number of minutes,
unless before that time a dangerous wound is given,
when it ceases. Both are presumed to have proven
their courage, and that is the real object of the en-
counter." Hon. Aaron Sargent, the American Minis-
ter at Berlin, writes to a friend of one young man
upon whose courage some reflection had been made,
and who at once challenged the student who had
spoken the words; and states that, "although the
fight proceeded with great gallantry the specified
time, the umpire decided against the challenger on
the ground that twice during the combat he had
dodged slightly; and, despite his assertion to the con-
trary, and despite the fact that he was covered with
blood from head to foot, the decision was maintained
against him, and he had nothing to do but to quit
the university, give up all hope of a commission in
the army, and go home." The man who shirks never
so little in ohe of these encounters would not be ad-
mitted into any regiment. Further, a man must
fight whenever challenged, reason or no reason; and
even if he has proven his courage and power of en-
durance upon former occasions, there is no escape
from that.

Apropos, from a Bremen letter published in the Cin-
cinnati Commercial Gazette in August, 1883, the follow-
ing paragraph is selected:

An American student who was at Gottingen last winter
says that twelve duels were fought there in one day. He
also relates the following incident which occurred at that
place : An American student unintentionally gave offence to
three German students by pushing against them in hurriedly

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 59

passing along the street. They went on a few steps, then
came back and insisted on having satisfaction for the in-
sult ; he must fight a duel with one of their number. He de-
clined, saying, " I am an American. I do not fight." But
they quickly repeated, "We must have satisfaction." He
replied, " Well, if you must, you can have it ;" and, throwing
off his coat, he went at them with his fists, knocked all three
of them down, and one of them quite out into the gutter.
Then putting on his coat, he walked away as if nothing of a
very serious character had happened. Somewhat bewildered
over the situation, the three German students picked them-
selves up and went their way ; and the otherwise quiet and
inoffensive American was not afterward challenged to fight
a duel, or otherwise molested.

Some two weeks later a number of the gilded German
youth with trepanned skulls made up their minds that it was
about time to fresco the frontispiece of a young American
named Lennig, who had been sent by his father, a German-
American of New York, to the University of Jena. In ac-
cordance with their custom, Lennig was expected to prove
his courage in the usual foolish way, by standing up and per-
mitting himself to be slashed at by another fool, and covered
with the usual honorable "scars." But he declined to en-
gage in any such unmitigated foolishness, and thus exhibi-
ted his possession of good, solid American sense. Then fol-
lowed a period of hazing. He was gibed at as a coward — an
American milksop. The students generally refused to asso-
ciate with him, and his challenger heaped insults upon him
until his student-life became so insufferable that he at last
accepted the challenge, and turned the tables upon his per-
secutors by naming pistols as the weapons — which, being the
challenged party, was his right to do. Now it was the chal-
lenger's part to show either the white feather or fight. It
was against all precedent, he said ; it was exposing his life :
but he had no alternative but to fight with pistols. Now, no
one will question the physical courage of the average Ger-
man university student. And so the meeting followed, Len-
nig killing his man at the first fire. He fled to Switzerland

60 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

immediately afterward, whence he was extradited, and an
attempt made to convict him of the offence of duelling with
fatal result. The case failed, however, and Lennig was dis-
charged from arrest on the ground that duelling is not named
in the treaty between Germany and Switzerland as an offence
for which persons may be subject to extradition. Lennig, it
is stated, has received no more challenges, and probably
never will.

During the month of August, 1882, an Englishman who
was visiting Heidelberg, and putting up at the principal
hotel, once dined at the table d'hote ; and being seated right
opposite to a young man who wore the badge of a " corps"
across his breast, he could not help noticing the extraordi-
nary manner in which this young man took his meal. At
first he admired him for the skilful manner in which he
managed his knife, which incessantly passed from his plate
to his mouth, heavily laden as it was with green peas. But
when the student, having finished his meat, took up his
gravy with the knife, the Englishman began to feel his blood
boil within him. Pudding with apple-sauce followed, and
the student operated with his dessert-knife just as he had
done with the larger knife. But the Englishman could con-
trol himself no longer. In a hoarse whisper he addressed
his vis-d~v£s, saying, " You will cut your mouth open if you
don't leave off eating gravy with your knife." The student
looked up and answered, " What is that to you ? I can cut
my mouth open to my ears, for all you have a right to inter-
fere." " Oh, nonsense !" said the Englishman, coolly ; " you
can't expect a decent person to let you butcher yourself at
dinner." " Oh, but I can, though, and you shall see. Dum-
mer Junge !" With that the student rose and left the room.
Dummer Junge ! (Stupid fellow !) signifies as much as a chal-
lenge. When the student's seconds came to arrange details
with the Englishman, he was terribly surprised at the serious
consequences of what he had deemed a most natural remark.
He offered to apologize, and begged them to remember that
he knew nothing of German customs, and had believed him-
self in the right. But the seconds declared their friend would

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 6 1

accept no apology, and they even hinted that the Englishman
had probably been told that his opponent was a first-rate
fencer — the pride of Heidelberg. Of course, when matters
took this turn, the Englishman spoke in a very different tone,
and everything was arranged for a duel with pistols, he being
no fencer. He spent a dreadful night, because he was told
that the young student was in such a foaming rage that his
only desire was to see his opponent lie dead on the ground.
The Englishman did all in his power to have the matter ar-
ranged, but he did not succeed ; and, on his way to the tryst-
ing-place, he said to his seconds, " It is a dreadful shame that
I should have to kill this young man because he does not
know the proper use of his knife and fork. Still, it would
be just as unfair to let him kill me." The Englishman in-
tended firing in the air if he had the second shot, but chance
was averse to him. He had the right to shoot first. The
aim was deadly : the young Teuton fell without a groan.

A letter from Vienna to the London Daily News
in September, 1882, says:

The University of Jena, and indeed the whole city, have
passed through a week of intense alarm and anxiety which
are far from being at an end even now. On one day twenty-
one serious duels took place among the students ; and, the
arms used not having been properly cleaned, all those who
were wounded had their blood poisoned. About forty young
men are lying in the hospital in a serious condition. One
great favorite, the only son of wealthy parents, had his mind
upset by an intense attack of fever, and committed suicide
by taking strychnine. He died after a terrible agony that
lasted many hours. Two more have died already, and there
is little hope of saving more than one half of those who are
still in a pitiable condition. This dreadful calamity will no
doubt serve to make university duelling very unpopular in
Germany, if not with the young men themselves, certainly
with their relations.

A correspondent of the St. Louis (Mo.) Republican

62 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

sent to that paper in August, 1883, the following
graphic account of a university duel:

One spring morning, not many years ago, I found myself
on the road between a large university town in Saxony and
a neighboring village where a series of duels was to take
place between the various corps of the university. Fresh
from one of our largest American colleges, I was desirous of
becoming acquainted with the life and habits of the German
students ; and having made the acquaintance of several
members of the corps " Lusatia," was invited by them to wit-
ness a " mensur," or series of sword-duels, which was to take
place in a village near at hand. After a ride of about an
hour in the queer German two-storied horse-cars, we alight-
ed at a point where two roads crossed, and, after a short
walk, arrived at a beer-hall, which had been chosen for the
scene of action. On entering the house I found about seven-
ty or eighty students assembled, all wearing the gayly col-
ored caps, and ribbons across the breast, indicating their
several corps. They were far better dressed and better
looking than the average run of German students, as the
corps represent the highest social classes in the university.
Their bright-colored caps and bands gave them a pictur-
esque appearance, and the fine bearing of many indicated
that they had already gone through one years' term of ser-
vice in the army. This was to be a day of more than ordi-
nary interest, as thirteen duels were to take place. As had
been explained to me, these encounters were not caused by
any ill-feeling between the various combatants, but were
simply a friendly trial of courage and skill. The seniors or
presiding officers of the various corps had met, and had
matched certain members of the different corps against each
other, who were to fight simply as a matter of amusement.
Preparations for the first duel commenced soon after we ar-
rived. A member of the corps " Lusatia" was to meet a
Westphalian in what was known as a fifteen-minute duel
with seconds. This was the duel in vogue when the duel-
lists had no quarrel with each other, and was regarded as

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 63

less dangerous than the duel without seconds, which was
carried on for twenty-five minutes or until a disabling
wound. Seconds are present in both cases, but in the duel
with seconds a halt can be called as soon as five blows have
been struck on each side, and a momentary rest is allowed,
while in the duel without seconds a halt can be called when
blood has been drawn. I went to watch the preparations
made by my friend of the Lusatians, which certainly were
elaborate enough. The blows were all to be directed against
the head and face ; so all other parts of the body which
might be struck by accident had to be protected. He first
took off his coat, vest, and shirt, and drew on his " pauck-
hund," or fighting-shirt, a coarse cotton garment, which was
used to save the finer linen, as blood enough was shed in al-
most every encounter to ruin the garment upon which it
flowed. Then upon his right arm was drawn a sleeve of
wadded silk, extending from the wrist to the shoulder.
Covering his right armpit a heavy leather pad was buckled,
in order to protect the sinews at this point, and a similar pad
was fastened over the heart. A heavy fencing-glove was
placed on the hand, and then the arm from the wrist to the
shoulder was wrapped with strips of silk until the limb was
nearly as thick as a man's thigh. Silk was used because it
gave protection against cuts. A thickly wadded silk cravat
was fastened around the throat, and heavy iron goggles, pro-
jecting half an inch from the eyes, guarded these from in-
jury. Next the " pauckhozen," or fighting-breeches, were
donned. These were of very thick padded leather, and cov-
ered the front of the body from the breast nearly to the
knees, and were fastened behind by strap and buckle. In
this portentous panoply a man was scarcely to be recognized
by his best friend, and presented a truly frightful appear-
ance, as cravat, breeches, and pads were stiff with the blood
shed in hundreds of previous encounters. His equipment
was rendered complete by the duelling- sword, or "schlager,"
a weapon about forty inches long, with an iron guard shaped
like an inverted saucer, a blunt point, and a ^double edge
ground sharp as a razor for about eighteen inches along each

64 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

side. The right arm, thus bandaged and carrying the
sword, was supported by a friend, who held it at right angles
to the duellist's body. This friend wore a heavy buckskin
glove, which was for the purpose of protecting his hand, as
he was to straighten the sword if it should become bent in
the course of the contest. Both combatants now being pre-
pared, they advanced to the centre of the room, and took
their position about three feet from each other, each stand-
ing upon a cross marked with chalk upon the floor. Fronrthis
mark they were under no circumstances allowed to advance
or retreat by so much as an inch during the progress of the
duel, drawing back to avoid a blow being punished by
instant expulsion from the corps. As had been explained to
me, all blows were directed against the head and face, the
guarding being done with the sword and padded right arm.
Skill was was not nearly so much a desideratum as a bold,
fearless bearing, it being no discredit to get the worst of an
encounter, but being considered very disgraceful to exhibit
the least fear of a wound. This made the duels often rather
exhibitions of recklessness than of skill, and gave the " Bur-
schenshaft" a great advantage in their duels with the corps
students, as they were by their rules allowed to fence cau-
tiously and wait for an opening to be offered by their antag-
onists, a mode of fighting which caused them to be greatly
despised by the corps. The seconds stood at the left of the
fighters. Each wore a cap with a heavy visor, a pad with the
corps colors over the stomach, and carried a basket-hiked
sword. The umpire stood a few feet to the side of the com-
batants. His duty was to note the time, to give word for the
various halts, and to declare the number of blows which
drew blood. The fifteen minutes allowed for the duel in-
cluded only the actual fighting time, that consumed in the
pauses between the rounds being deducted by the umpire.
All being now ready, the Lusatian second called out, " Um-
pire, please command silence for a fifteen-minute mensur be-
tween Lusatia and Westphalia with seconds." The umpire
gave the command, and the second then called out, " Auf der
mensur. Bindet die klingen." (On the mensur. Bind the

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 65

blades.) The swords were crossed, the seconds touched them
with their own, the Westphalian second said, " Gebunden
sind " (They are bound), and the duellists took their guard.
This is effected by raising the right arm over the head, so
that it protects the top of the head, the sword hanging
down parallel to the left side of the face and guarding that.
As soon as both were on guard the Lusatian second gave
the " Los !" (Loose), which was the signal for commencement.
Immediately on the word being given both began striking at
each other, it being a point of honor to strike the first blow.
The striking was all done from the wrist, as the arm must
be kept above the head as a guard, and thrusting is not al-
lowed. The endeavor of each was to touch his opponent by
reaching over the protecting arm, thus striking the scalp,
or the left cheek when unguarded. For a few seconds
nothing was heard but the clashing of the sword-blades
against each other and against the iron hilts, or the dull
flapping sound when they struck upon the padded arms.
The movement of the blades was so rapid that an unprac-
tised eye could not tell the result. But after four or five
blows had been delivered the Lusatian second cried " Halt !"
and the swords were struck up, as a thin stream of blood
was seen flowing from the hair to the temple of the West-
phalian, which soon spread over his face and trickled down
upon his fighting-shirt. The second then said, " Umpire,
please declare a ' blutigen' (bloody one) on the head." The
umpire replied, " It is declared." The doctor, who was
standing near, looking at the cut, pronounced it insignifi-
cant, the second again called out " Auf der mensur," etc.,
and the contest recommenced. So it went on, now one re-
ceiving a cut, now the other, until the prescribed fifteen
minutes had elapsed, when the duel ceased and the men
were led off to be divested of their defensive armor and
their injuries attended to. A table had been placed near a
window, on which were basins of water, sponges, and a num-
ber of crooked needles threaded with colored silk. The
cuts were washed, plastered, and when of any considerable
depth sewed up with silk. The doctor kept a book in which

66 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

was entered the number of cuts received and the number of
stitches required to sew them up, and this list was the offi-
cial record of the duel. In this instance the Lusatian had
received nine " blutigen" with five " needles," or stitches,
while his antagonist had received twelve of the former,
with seven of the latter. They were soon through with the
doctor, and were seen talking and drinking their beer as if
nothing had happened. In the mean time preparations
were going on for the next affair, and the men were now
ready. In this instance one of the Saxon corps had chal-
lenged a member of one of the " Burschenschaft," societies
similar to the corps, but considered as occupying a lower
social position ; and as insulting words had passed, the duel
was to be of the more serious kind, lasting twenty-five min-
utes, or until one should receive a wound which the doctor
should pronounce to be sufficiently serious to close the duel.
It may be remarked that this decision rests entirely in the
hands of the doctor, as it is feared that if left to the duellist
himself he might continue the encounter until his injuries
should become so severe as to endanger his life. When the
men took their places, the difference between the style of
the corps and that of the Burschenschaft was at once appar-
ent. The Saxon commenced in a dashing style, striking as
rapidly as possible, and paying comparatively little attention
to his own safety ; while his opponent remained cautiously
on the guard, took three blows for one returned, and warily
watched his chance. This style of fencing gave him a great
advantage, which he soon turned to decisive account. As
the Saxon delivered a blow at his face, he drew back his
head so that the blow passed by him (a manoeuvre allowed
by the Burschenschaft, but strictly forbidden among the
corps), and then struck a blow upon the Saxon's unguarded
cheek which the doctor pronounced sufficiently serious to
occasion the discontinuance of the duel. Two or three
duels of no particular note followed, and then a general stir
and excitement could be observed, as the great event of the
day was about to take place. The " senior," or president, of
the Thuringers was to meet the senior of the Westphalians.

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 67

These two were regarded as the two best " schlagers" in the
university, and the issue of this encounter was looked upon
as deciding the supremacy of one or the other. The West-
phalian was a tall, active, rather dandified-looking fellow,
with jet-black hair and mustache, and very few scars for so
renowned a fighter. He was noted for the quickness of his
eye, the suppleness of his waist, and the skill with which he
struck a certain blow in tierce. The Thuringer was some-
what shorter, but of far stronger build, had thick blond hair,
and bore dozens of scars on his face. He was not regarded
as so finished and elegant a swordsman as his antagonist,
but his great strength, heavy blows, and endurance gave
many ground for the belief that if he should not be disabled
within the first five minutes his chances for ultimate victory
were excellent. Great reliance was placed by his friends on
a certain " durchzieher," or drawing-stroke, across an op-
ponent's face, which he struck with tremendous force. The
men took their ground, the swords were crossed, and the
word given. It was at once apparent that two master-hands
were at work. The heavy blades fairly whistled through the
air, and the rapidity with which blows were given and re-
turned was bewildering. Within a few minutes blood was
flowing from three cuts on the Thuringer's head, while the
Westphalian had only one slight scratch on the left cheek.
But the work was beginning to tell. Both men breathed
heavily during the pauses, but the beads of perspiration on
the Westphalian's face showed that he was beginning to feel
severely the exertion of striking and parrying the slashing
blows of his opponent. At the third or fourth blow of the
seventh round there was a tinkle and a crash, and the T hur,
inger's blade flew half across the room, broken short off at
the guard. As another sword was handed him, blood was
observed to be trickling through his thick hair from a
wound which had escaped even the quick eye of the oppos-
ing second at the moment of infliction. The doctor looked
at it, shook his head, looked at it again, but, apparently in
response to the appealing glances cast upon him, suffered
the duel to proceed. The five minutes regarded as so dan-

68 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

gerous for the Thuringer had now passed, and his friends
began to feel great confidence in the result. Still the West-
phalian was a finished swordsman, and he attacked as boldly
as at first. But it might be observed that the blows were
not delivered with quite the same lightning-like rapidity as
during the earlier rounds, and a slight slowness in returning
to guard more than once caused him to make a very narrow
escape. The Thuringer perceived this, and his blows came
crashing in with redoubled force. They fell with tremen-
dous violence on the blade and bandaged arm of his antag-
onist, and it was evident that unless the latter could do
something decisive within a very few minutes, failing
strength would put him at his opponent's mercy. The
Westphalian recognized this, and directed all his efforts
to this end. The next few blows were struck with less
attention to his guard and greater effort to end the contest
with a single effective blow. The result of this was seen the
next moment in a long gash on his forehead, showing where
he had recovered guard too slowly after a reckless attempt
to reach the Thuringer's head by striking over his arm. His
strength was fast ebbing, but he had set his heart upon vic-
tory, and determined to make one more desperate effort.
Collecting all his remaining strength, and rising on his toes
to increase the effort of the stroke, he discharged a blow
with all his force at the top of the Thuringer's head. It was
delivered with great judgment and skill. His blade seemed
fairly to curl over the Thuringer's protecting arm, and the
sharp steel cut a gash from behind the crown nearly to the
forehead. A stream of blood at once covered the Thur-
inger's face and shirt and dyed them a deep crimson. But
this telling stroke had not gone unavenged. As the West-
phalian lifted his blade he had, for an instant, exposed his
left cheek, and at the very instant when he was himself
struck the Thuringer brought his sword with terrific force
across the Westphalian 's cheek, which was laid open from
the ear to the nose. Both seconds cried " Halt !" simulta-
neously, and struck up the swords. The doctor's verdict
was not needed to inform every one that neither was able

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 69

to proceed with the duel. Both were led to the operating-
tables, thus ending what was universally admitted to be the
best " mensur" ever seen by any present. It was not only
remarkable for the skill displayed, but also for the severe
character of the wounds, and for the very unusual circum-
stance that both men received disabling cuts at the same
instant, thus leaving the question of superiority undecided.
As soon as the general excitement had somewhat dimin-
ished, preparations for another duel were commenced ; but
the men were scarcely half-armed, when one of the students,
who had been stationed outside to keep watch, rushed in
with the news that the police were approaching. Instantly
all was hurry and copfusion. The young men who were
being prepared for the next duel were hurried off into a
loft, where their trappings were removed and hidden, the
swords were thrown into the cellar, tables were drawn into
the middle of the room, and when the representatives of the
law appeared at the door, they saw only a number of stu-
dents sitting over their beer. But as it was evident that
nothing more could be accomplished for the present, it was
decided to adjourn for the day, and a general move was
made for the city, which we all reached late in the after-
noon, after what was admitted to be a very successful day
" on the mensur."

No portion of Europe has been exempt from the
evil of duelling; and next to those countries already
presented may be placed Italy, then Spain, Russia,
Sweden, and so on down to Denmark and Wales.
The judicial duel, or trial by wager of battle, pre-
vailed in the foregoing countries, as in the others
heretofore described, for many hundreds of years, and
at last gave way to the private duel. This latter
raged in Italy from 1600 to 1700 with all the alarming
popularity that it did in France during the same
time; and the common inquiry was, when two gentle-
men met in the morning, "Who fought yesterday?"

?O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

or, "What is the news from the field to-day?" The
judicial duel survived in Italy until nearly 1600; al-
though, even at that latter date, the private affairs of
"gentlemen of honor" were conducted upon a san-
guinary scale. There are rigid laws in Italy at pres-
ent against the custom, although there are meetings
occasionally: as may naturally be expected in a
country which permits its hot-blooded youth to study
the art of killing as openly taught in the fencing-
schools of Florence, Naples, and Milan. The Italians,
and especially the Neapolitans, have always been
regarded as the best swordsmen? in the world; and
the first families of Italy still believe in "keeping
their hands in" by constant practice.

There have always^ been Spanish laws forbidding
duelling; and in 1490 Ferdinand and Isabella made
an example of the Count of Luna and the Count of
Valencia for exchanging a cartel of defiance, and had
them imprisoned, although Ferdinand had previously
challenged Alfonzo, King of Portugal, >to meet him
in mortal combat. There has been an act of the
Cortes for three hundred years, which has never been
repealed, subjecting all parties to a duel to the penal-
ties of treason.

One of the most romantic modern events was the
duel fought at Temesvar, Hungary, on the 23d day
of October, 1883, between Count Stephan Batthyany
and Julius Rosenberg, a young advocate, in which
the former was instantly killed. The particulars
show the tragedy to have been the climax of a thrill-
ing romance in real life, some of the personages of
which, except the successful duellist, are connected
with the highest Hungarian aristocracy. During the
preceding summer, Dr. Rosenberg, who is a young

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 7 1

Hebrew lawyer in Pesth, made the acquaintance at a
Bohemian watering-place of Miss Hona von Schos-
berger, the younger daughter of a rich Jewish banker
and land-owner named Heinrich Schosberger de
Tornya. The young people fell in love with each
other. The girl's parents, however, influenced by
their son-in-law, Baron Bornemissa, who had married
their eldest daughter, and who declared that the mar-
riage would be a mesalliance and would oblige him to
break his (the Baron's) relations with them, refused
their consent. The consequence was that the young
couple were secretly married. Immediately after the
ceremony the lady returned to her father's house.
Dr. Rosenberg shortly afterward appeared there and
demanded his bride. Herr von Schosberger was
ready to acknowledge his son-in-law, but Baron
Bornemissa was of a different opinion, and wanted
to shoot the young plebeian. By the Baron's orders,
the young lady was sent to Paris, and from there to
one of her father's castles in one of the wildest regions
in the interior of Hungary. Subsequently it was
announced that Miss Hona von Schosberger had
become a Catholic and had gone to Wiesbaden,
Germany, where she had been betrothed to Count
Batthyany. Dr. Rosenberg, hearing the rumor,
hastened there and had an interview with the Count,
in which he told him that the young woman he was
about to marry was his (Rosenberg's) wife. He ap-
pealed to his rival's honor, and begged him not to
force the young girl into an illegal marriage to
which she herself was opposed. The Count for-
mally refused to either listen to him or to pay
any attention to the challenge which the lawyer
sent to him, on the ground that the challenger was

72 THE FIELD OF HONOR,

not his equal in birth. The matter was laid be-
fore a "court of honor" in Pesth, and after a long
argument it was decided that Rosenberg was compe-
tent to challenge the Count. The latter still refused
to pay any attention to it, and the lawyer published
his challenge in all the journals, with the added
stigma of such epithets as "coward," "poltroon,"
applied to the Count. The latter's friends came to
his rescue, and a peculiar newspaper controversy
ensued, in the midst of which the Count married
Miss von Schosberger, and started on a wedding-
tour with her to Italy. The young lawyer's vindic-
tive lampoon must, however, have finally induced the
Count to change his mind, for a few days before the
duel he returned to Hungary and accepted the chal-
lenge. The conditions were very rigorous. The pis-
tols were rifled. The duellists were to fire at twenty
paces. Three shots were to be exchanged, after each
of which they were to approach five paces toward
each other. The duel, as already stated, took place
at Temesvar. The Count fired the first shot and
missed. Dr. Rosenberg, without advancing the five
paces as he had a right to, aimed at his opponent and
fired. The ball struck the Count's right temple, and
passed through his brain. Death was instantaneous.
Leaving the seconds to take care of the corpse, Dr.
Rosenberg left the scene of the tragedy. The next
day at four o'clock the funeral-services of the Count
took place at Temesvar. The coffin was covered
with splendid wreaths, one of which bore the inscrip-
tion, "To my adored husband."

Gustavus Adolphus, of Sweden, was a prominent
foe to all manners of mortal combat, and at one time
during his reign established a court of honor, and

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 73

issued an order that any subject, civil or military,
who should send or accept a challenge should be
punished by execution ; and it is related of the King
that, upon a certain occasion, after granting permis-
sion to two of his officers to engage in a duel, he
repaired to the place selected for the hostile encoun-
ter, accompanied by a squadron of cavalry and the
public executioner, and surrounded the combatants
and their friends, and said, just as the principals were
advancing with their drawn weapons : " Do not be
surprised, gentlemen ; for, according to the laws of
your country, your lives are already forfeited. You
may now proceed with the combat ; but, mark you !
the moment either of you falls by the sword of the
other, that instant the executioner strikes off the
head of the survivor by order of your king !" Of
course, the combat did not proceed ; but, after re-
covering from their surprise and mortification, the
two officers knelt at the feet of their sovereign, im-
plored his forgiveness, and then embraced and for-
gave each other. Gustavus declared that, although
he should positively never again interfere with the
course of the law for the punishment of such of-
fences, he would bestow his pardon upon the offend-
ing officers, and added : " It is my wish to have
soldiers under my command, and not gladiators. If
any man is desirous of freeing his character from the
imputation of cowardice in the eyes of his fellow-
countrymen, let him do so at the expense of the
common enemy." There is something seemingly
noble and certainly dramatic in this whole perform-
ance of Gustavus ; but not so highly dramatic as his
galloping after Colonel Seaton, a Scotch officer in his
service, whom he had offended, and exclaiming to the

74 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

indignant Scot, after overtaking the latter outside of
the Kingis dominions, "Dismount, sir! I acknowl-
edge that I have injured you, and I have come to
give you the satisfaction of a gentleman ; for we are
now without my dominions, and Gustavus and you
are equal !" Seaton, however (to complete the story),
recovering from his surprise, dismounted, as Gus-
tavus had already done ; and, falling on his knees,
said : " Sire, you have more than given me satisfac-
tion, in condescending to make me your equal. God
forbid that my sword should do any mischief to so
brave and gracious a sovereign. Permit me to re-
turn to Stockholm, and allow me the honor to live
and die in your service." The King raised his com-
panion from the ground, embraced him, and they
returned together to Stockholm.

The laws against duelling in Russia, like many of
the laws of that country, have been very severe ; and
the terrors of Siberian exile have undoubtedly been
the cause of prolonging many a valuable life which
would have otherwise been lost unnecessarily had not
the dreadful picture of the horrors of banishment
been kept well in view. Fedor III., Peter the Great,
and Paul all forbade duelling in the army, although
the latter, in 1800, invited the sovereigns of Europe
to meet at St. Petersburg and settle all existing dis-
putes in a combat, with Talleyrand, Pitt, and Bern-
stoff as seconds. During the reign of Catherine II.,
some time in 1776, Field-Marshal Potemkin, who had
won the affections of the Empress, and who had
afterward secured and maintained an arrogant ad-
ministration of all Russian affairs of state, was chal-
lenged by and fought with Alexis Orliff. The
weapons used by these two princes were swords ;

DUELLING IN GERMAN COUNTRIES. 75

and, after a protracted combat, Alexis was defeated,
although Potemkin came out of the difficulty with
the loss of an eye. In 1849, Baron de Heckeren, an
officer of the Russian Imperial Guard, killed Pouch-
kin, the poet, in a duel with pistols, and was after-
ward dishonorably dismissed the service and com-
pelled to leave his country.

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER V.
DUELLING IN AMERICA.

The First " Affair of Honor" on the Western Continent — The
Four most noted Fatal Duels in the United States — The Ameri-
can Code: "Posting" — Wilkinson and Randolph — Captain
Dawson, of South Carolina, knighted by the Pope — The
"Code" of the "Cowboys" — A Desperate Encounter —
Characteristics of the Cowboys — Early Days in California
— Hicks Graham and Yank Maguire — An Incident in the Life
of General Magruder — The Tragic Story of the Bowie-Knife.

THE history of duelling in America is replete with
thrilling and heart-rending chapters — and especially
from 1770 until 1840 — although public opinion in the
United States has never sanctioned the custom to the
extent that it has been countenanced in other coun-
tries. It is a curious fact that the modes of dealing
with the evil in the United States and in European
countries have been quite the reverse : that, while
European rulers have made every effort — even to the
dragging of wounded duellists from the field of
action to places of execution — to suppress the mur-
derous custom, their subjects have generally held it
in high favor ; and that, while the people of the
United States, with too few prominent exceptions to
mention, have always deprecated duelling in all its
forms, the laws of many of the States up to 1850
were not such as to make the practice criminal or

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 77

odious, and a bill to prohibit the sending and accept-
ing challenges in the District of Columbia did not
pass until 1838 ; and even then the Hon. Thomas
Clayton, United States Senator from Delaware,
while he maintained his abhorrence of the custom,
and believed duelling to be both illegal and im-
moral, claimed " that it was not of that class of
crimes which should subject offenders to the cells of
a penitentiary and make them the associates of
felons." Mr. Linn, a Senator from Missouri, was
aware that duelling was not defensible on principles
of Christianity, and concluded by saying: "All the
States have concurred in denouncing the practice of
duelling as an evil in itself ; and yet, have we not
seen them, through their Legislatures or Executives,
stay the laws ? From what I have seen, fighting is
like marrying: the more barriers that are erected
against it, the surer are the interested parties to
come together." Mr. Preston, of South Carolina,
who was also opposed to duelling, thought that " the
severer the laws the more inefficient." Mr. Sevier, of
Arkansas, "did not believe in legislating against the
custom." The great Clay, of Kentucky, declared
that he would be happy to see the barbarous system
abolished. " The man with a high sense of honor,"
said Mr. Clay, "and nice sensibility, when the ques-
tion is whether he shall fight or have the finger of
scorn pointed at him, is unable to resist; and few, very
few, are found willing to adopt such an alternative.
When public opinion is renovated and chastened by
reason, religion, and humanity, the practice of duel-
ling will be discountenanced. It is the office of
legislation," however, to do all it can to bring about
this healthful state of the public mind ; and, al-

78 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

though it might not altogether effect so desirable a
result, I have no doubt it will do much toward it, and
I shall give my vote for the bill " — and the bill was
passed by 34 yeas and i nay (Sevier of Arkansas).

There are few commonwealths in the American
Union in which duelling has been absolutely un-
known ; even the little State of Rhode Island and
her severer sister (Massachusetts) having been scenes
of mortal combat, in which personal difficulties were
forever settled upon bloody fields. It is a note-
worthy fact, however, that the laws against the
tyrannical custom have always been more vigorous
and restraining in the Northern States than in the
Southern, although two of the most eminent Ameri-
can crusaders against the evil were Charles Cotes-
worth Pinckney and Robert Barnwell Rhett, of South
Carolina. It is the boast of Illinois that but one duel
has ever been fought upon her soil — in which the
challenged party (Alphonso Stewart) was killed and
the survivor (William Bennett) hanged. The records
of duelling in the Southern States, so far as the
author has been able to reach them, show that the
custom has been most populaily adhered to in
Virginia, South Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Loui-
siana, and Arkansas, although all of the other com-
monwealths in the Southern cluster are more or less
dotted with sanguinary fields. There have been
more fatal duels in California (fought according to
the code duello% or similar regulations) than in all of
the other so-called Northern States ; and between the
years 1850 and 1860 more fatal encounters took place
in the Golden State than elsewhere in the Union
during the same length of time.

Two tragic events took place in Virginia and South

DUELLING IN AMERICA, 79

Carolina early in the nineteenth century which had
the effect of suppressing the custom in those States,
for a short time, at least. In the former, near Rich-
mond, there lived a notorious duellist named Powell,
who purposely met and insulted an English traveller
for having said that " the Virginians were of no use
to the American Union, it requiring one half of the
people to keep the other half in order." The remark
was made the subject of a national quarrel, and at
last Powell challenged the audacious Briton to fight.
The latter accepted the challenge, and secured an-
other noted American duellist as his second, and
went into training for the combat, which took place
in a few days afterward, in the presence of a large
number of peopk, and in which Powell was killed at
the first shot. At about the same time there was a
duelling society in Charleston (S. C.), where each
member took precedence according to the number of
persons he had killed or wounded in duels ; and
about this time an old weather-beaten officer of the
English navy arrived at Charleston to look after some
property which had devolved upon him by right of
marriage with a lady of that city, and soon after got
into an altercation with the president of the duelling
club, who challenged the stranger and was accepted.
Early the following morning eight or ten gentlemen
called upon the Englishman and informed him that
the American was a "dead shot;" and added that,
although the members of the society were generally
of the wealthy class, the organization was held in
disrepute by the more respectable citizens, and that
he would be held in no disesteem by declining to
meet a professional duellist. The stranger replied
that he was afraid of no duellist in the world ; that

8O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

he had accepted the challenge in good faith and pro-
posed to meet his man. The parties accordingly met,
and at the first fire the Englishman mortally wounded
his antagonist, who, while lingering in great agony,
called the members of the club to his bedside and
requested them to disorganize, and to do all in their
power to suppress the further encouragement of an
atrocious custom the practice of which had at last
brought him to his grave'. The members carried out
faithfully the dying request of their late comrade by
disorganizing the day after the interment; and thus
ended the first and last duelling society in the United
States.

Very good authority may be given for the state-
ment that the first real duel fought in America took
place at Plymouth (Massachusetts), on the i8th of
June, 1621, between Edward Doty and Edward
Leicester — two servants — both of whom fought with
daggers and were wounded, one in the hand and the
other in the leg. It was extremely fortunate for one
or perhaps for both of the combatants that neither
was killed : and, in all probability, it was the very
best thing that could have happened both of them
that each sustained serious injury ; for their meeting
produced great excitement, not only on account of
the outrage committed by them, but for the reason
that the combatants were servants of gentlemen, and
not "real gentlemen," therefore, themselves. Still,
as both men sustained severe injuries, some sympathy
was manifested for them, and they were only sentenced
to the punishment of having their heads and feet tied
together and of lying thus for twenty-four hours
without food or drink — which sentence, however, was
suspended, after an hour's suffering, at the inter-

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 8 1

cession of tneir masters and upon their own pitiful
request and humble promise never again to startle
the government under which they lived by the com-
mission of a similar outrage. Thus the evil was
"nipped in the bud," so to speak; and it was not
until after the commencement of the revolutionary
war that citizens of the United States met in mortal
combat to any dangerous extent. The custom came
into conspicuous practice, however, at the opening of
the nineteenth century, and raged to an alarming de-
gree (especially among officers of the army and navy)
until it was frowned upon by public opinion and in a
measure prohibited bylaws created for its abatement.
During the war with Tripoli many fatal collisions
took place between American and English officers,
and also in 1819 between American naval officers and
officers of the British garrison at Gibraltar. During
the civil war in the United States there were few or
no hostile meetings among Federal officers. Among
the Confederates there were a number of fatal duels,
the most conspicuous being that between General
Marmaduke, of Missouri, and General Walker, of
Georgia, in which the latter was slain.

Undoubtedly the four most noted fatal duels
fought in the United States were those between
Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, at Weehawken
(N. J.), July u, 1804; Stephen Decatur and James
Barren, at Bladensburg (Md.), March 22, 1820 ;
Jonathan Cilley and William J. Graves, near the
boundary-line of Maryland and the District of Co-
lumbia, February 24, 1838; and David C. Broderick
and David S. Terry, near Laguna de la Merced, about
twelve miles from San Francisco (Cal.), September
T3> T859- All of the challenged parties in these

82 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

encounters were mortally wounded or killed ; none of
the others were injured, except Barren, who, though
dangerously wounded, survived. The weapons used
in three of these duels were pistols, while Messrs.
Cilley and Graves fought with rifles. Hamilton had
been a general in the army and Burr was Vice-Presi-
dent of the United States; Decatur and Barron were
post-captains of the navy ; Cilley and Graves were
members of Congress from Maine and Kentucky ;
Broderick was a United States Senator from Cali-
fornia, and Terry was ex-Chief-Justice of the Su-
preme Court of the same State.

[The allusion just made to the four most noted fatal
meetings upon American soil is merely general, as the
author will present full descriptions of these encoun-
ters in later chapters, as well as accounts of many oth-
er distinguished combats, a number of which " were
settled with satisfaction to both parties" without the
shedding of priceless blood. He will also present de-
scriptions of all or nearly all of the fatal duels which
have taken place in America since the commencement
of the practice in that country, and of a great many
of the most celebrated European combats and chal-
lenges ; having spent much of his leisure time during
twenty years in obtaining accurate and interesting
information of this character. He has visited the
bloody field at Bladensburg, and surveyed the spot
upon which the noble Cilley fell ; he has viewed from
a western window of the Jumel mansion the well-
known shore of Weehawken, beyond the quiet Hudson,
where the illustrious Hamilton received his mortal
wound ; and he is familiar with the bloody ground
upon which the lamented Broderick madly flung a
chivalrous life away.]

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 83

There has been no strictly American Code of Honor,
although a majority of the duels fought in the United
States by gentlemen have been arranged and carried
on according to rules and regulations promiscuously
adopted from the code duello of foreign countries. " Post-
ing," however, is strictly an American conceit, and
seems to have originated with General James Wilkin-
son, U. S. A., whose challenge to John Randolph, mem-
ber of Congress from Virginia in 1807, was disdainfully
declined by the haughty Virginian, who concluded his
letter as follows : " In you, sir, I can recognize no
right to hold me accountable for my public or private
opinion of your character that would not subject me to
an equal claim from Colonel Burr or Sergeant Dun-
baugh. I cannot descend to your level. This is my
final answer." The audacious Wilkinson was not to
be thus summarily disposed of, and he indignantly
replied: "I have received your letter of the 25th
instant, by mail, in which you violate truth and honor
to indulge the inherent malignity and rancor of your
soul. On what level, pray, sir, shall we find the
wretch who, to mask his cowardice, fabricates false-
hoods, and heaps unprovoked insults upon unmerited
injuries? You cannot descend to my level! — vain,
equivocal thing ! And you believe this dastardly
subterfuge will avail you, or that your lion's skin will
longer conceal your true character? Embrace the
alternative, still in your reach, and ascend to the level
of a gentleman, if possible ; act like a man, if you can,
and spare me the pain of publishing you to the world
for an insolent, slanderous, prevaricating poltroon."
No further action in the matter was taken by Ran-
dolph ; and the next time Congress assembled Gen-
eral Wilkinson stuck up, or posted, notices, as follows,

84 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

in all the taverns and street-corners of the National
Capital :

HECTOR UNMASKED.— In justice to my character, I de-
nounce to the world John Randolph, a member of Congress,
as a prevaricating, base, calumniating scoundrel, poltroon,
and coward.

Posting became frequent in the United States after
this episode, and it has been no uncommon thing to
meet a card in a newspaper, or a notice in some pub-
lic place, declaring that " is an unprinci-
pled villain and a coward." The author has witnessed
many cases of this custom of posting in New Orleans,
Nashville, and Savannah, and calls to his mind,
while writing, that of a young gentleman of Los An-
geles (Cal.) who posted a former friend (with whom
he had had a disturbance at a party, and subsequent-
ly sent him a challenge which was unnoticed) " as a
cur and a coward," and sat under the notice with a
double-barrelled shot-gun for seventeen hours.

At present, all of the States and Territories of the
Union, either in their constitutions or laws, have rigid
provisions against the giving or accepting challenges,
acting as seconds, or in any way assisting those of-
fending. A majority of the States and Territories
prevent all such offenders from holding any office of
profit; and quite a number of the States provide for
the disfranchisement of such offenders. In California
and in several other States the act of " posting" and
publishing persons for not fighting a duel, or for not
sending or accepting a challenge to fight, or for the
use of any reproachful language — verbal, written, or
printed — to or concerning persons for not sending or
accepting a challenge to fight, or with intent to pro-

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 85

voke a duel, is punishable by fine and imprisonment.
There are also provisions for remedies by action for
injuries arising from duelling in most of the States,
and in a number there are laws providing that the
survivor of a fatal duel — who may also be tried for
murder — shall support the family of the deceased,
either by aggregate compensation in damages to each
member, or by a monthly, quarterly, or annual allow-
ance, to be determined by a court; and the slayer is
also liable for and must pay all debts of the person
slain or permanently disabled.

Articles 26 and 27 of Section 1342 Revised Statutes
of the United States says: " No officer or soldier shall
send a challenge to another officer or soldier to fight
a duel, or accept a challenge so sent. Any officer
who' so offends shall be dismissed from the service.
Any soldier who so offends shall suffer such corporal
punishment as a court-martial may direct; and all
seconds or promoters of duels, and all carriers of chal-
lenges to fight duels, shall be deemed principals, and
punished accordingly." Article 8 of Section 1624
says: "Such punishment as a court-martial may
adjudge may be inflicted on any person in the navy
who sends or accepts a challenge to fight a duel or
acts as a second in a duel."

It will be seen by the foregoing that duelling in the
United States has been made not only as criminal
and as odious as it seems possible to make the cus-
tom, but it is also made permanently expensive to
survivors of fatal encounters in many of the States,
while its indulgence, either as principals or seconds,
forever prohibits such offenders from holding politi-
cal or other positions of profit; this last provision
being (as United Senator Grundy, of Tennessee, once

86 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

declared, while condemning the practice), "severer
punishment, in the eyes of some people, even than ten
years' confinement in a penitentiary." Practically,
public opinion firmly sustains the consolidated enact-
ments for the suppression of duelling in the United
States; and, as an institution, it may be said to have
ceased to exist in our beloved country, — notwith-
standing the Cash-Shannon duel in South Carolina in
1880, the Elam-Beirne meeting in Virginia in 1883,
and later the remarkable encounter in Louisiana be-
tween a soda-water seller and a catfish dealer of New
Orleans, which was fought with rapiers, and lasted
eighty-three minutes before either of the combatants
drew blood.

No better illustration of the efficacy of the laws
against duelling can be presented than the statement
that the bill to remove the disabilities of persons con-
nected with duelling was defeated in the Virginia Le-
gislature on the ipth of December, 1883. During the
discussion, Mr. Pollard, of King and Queen, said that
duelling was contrary to the civilization of our age,
and public sentiment should frown it down. " He
had known men who had been in the front of battle
refuse to fight duels. The Code was no test of true
bravery in its highest sense." Mr. Leftwich thought
the law ought to be either enforced or repealed en-
tirely. Mr. Opie said that as nobody seemed to have
been hurt he was in favor of the bill. Mr. Saunders
said: "I am opposed to the bill." Mr. Opie— " Do
you believe any law can stop duelling ?" Mr. Saun-
ders— "I don't know whether it will or not." The
vote was taken, and the bill was defeated by the failure
to get a two-thirds vote. It will be remembered that,
early in the summer of 1883, Richard F. Beirne, edi-

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 87

tor of the Richmond State, and W. C. Elam, editor of
the Whig, met in mortal combat, in which the latter
was dangerously wounded. Mr. Beirne is one of the
most prominent Democrats in Virginia. His name
has been prominently mentioned in connection with
the nomination of his party for Governor in 1885.
The fact, however, that he has not attained the age re-
quired by the Constitution makes him ineligible for
that position. Mr. Elam is spoken of as the candi-
date of his party for the same office. It is for these
reasons that the Legislature was called upon, but re-
fused, to relieve the disabilities of these two gentle-
men incurred on the " field of honor."

In this connection it is pleasant to note that Captain
F. W. Dawson, editor of the Charleston (S. C.) News
and Courier, was created Knight of the Order of St.
George by the Pope, on account of his persistent op-
position to duelling, on November 23, 1883. Captain
Dawson is an Englishman by birth, joined the Con-
federate service in 1861, and served with distinction
during the civil war — the latter part of the time on
the staff of Fitz-Hugh Lee. After the surrender he
went to Charleston and served for some time as asso-
ciate editor on the Mercury, and left that paper on be-
coming part owner and editor of the Charleston News.
In a short time afterward he was challenged to mor-
tal combat by the manager of the Mercury / to which
Dawson responded that, being a Roman Catholic,
under no circumstances would he accept a challenge
or fight a duel. In 1866 a similar demand was made
by General Gary, a well-known South Carolinian, and
declined on the same grounds. Dawson then took an
active part against duels, and especially when the
Cash-Shannon duel took place in 1880. Up to that

88 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

time there never had been in South Carolina a trial
at common law for murder in a duel, and the Cash
trials, although the jury disagreed on the first trial
and a verdict of acquittal was rendered on the second
trial, were the death-blow to duelling in that State.
The Legislature took the matter up and passed a
statute making duelling murder, and requiring every
public officer in the State, in addition to the usual
office oath, to take an oath not to send or receive a
challenge or engage in a duel while in office; and
there has not been a duel in the State since the pas-
sage of the law.

There is one exception, however, to the statements
heretofore made; that is, there still remains a duel-
ling custom among a class of Americans known as
the " cowboys" of the West, which nothing but the
overwhelming approach of civilization and power of
empire can effectually obliterate. The cowboy is os-
tensibly an owner or herder of stock upon unpur-
chased or unpaid-for ranges of nutritious grasses in
the western part of the United States; but, in reality,
he is a stealer of horses and cattle, a guzzler of adul-
terated spirits, and a shooter of men; and it may be
said of him, with perfect truthfulness, that he fears
neither God, man, nor devil. He roams over a vast
area of sparsely settled or unsettled country lying be-
tween the twenty-ninth and forty-seventh parallels of
latitude and between meridians of longitude twenty-
two and thirty-eight. He is most numerously and
lawlessly found, however, in the Territories of Mon-
tana, Arizona, and New Mexico; although he is by
no means so scarce in the States of Texas, Kansas,
and Colorado that he is never seen. He is an Apollo
Belvidere in physical shape and beauty; he dresses in

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 89

true frontier style — in a blue flannel shirt and flam-
ing red necktie, dark pants stuck into high-legged
kip boots, and sombrero. He earries a wicked knife
in a boot-leg, and one or more revolvers at his waist.
His arms and ammunition are always kept in perfect
order, and he is the most accomplished shot in the
world. He is a matchless rider, and may often be
seen by the traveller through Arizona and New
Mexico tearing through the chapparal like lightning
alongside of a railway-train, whooping like a Coman-
che, and sending harmless bullets through the head-
light of the locomotive. He is at once generous,
reckless, lawless, dissipated, desperate, and danger-
ous, and dashes furiously through the hell upon earth
of his own creating like a picturesque devil to his
grave. His "code" is to "always go well heeled and
never let an enemy get the drop on him"

There are different grades and samples of the genus
cowboy: there is the " Howler of the Prairies," the
" Terror from the Upper Trail," and the " Blizzard of
the States." Their manners and customs, however,
are about the same, except that many of them have
had superior advantages of education and home in-
fluences, while others were rocked in the cradle of
infamy at the start. Few of them live to be thirty
years of age, and ninety-nine out of every hundred
who are sent to their last account fill dishonored
graves through the medium of a deadly missile or
the forbidding noose of the hangman. The writer
has seen the redoubtable " Billy the Kid" (who, when
only nineteen, had killed his eleventh man), and has
heard him tell the story of his murderous exploits
with marvellous nonchalance. He has witnessed
" Curly Bill " shoot off the winkers of a man without

90 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

harming the sight, and pick off the stoppers from
liquor-decanters at twenty paces without fracturing
their necks. He has heard this renowned devil boast
of his own private cemetery, which, he said, lacked
only one of a score of graves; and has then observed
him draw his six-shooter quietly and take off a
button from a companion's coat. Both of these
desperate fellows have been laid away in unknown
sarcophagi, like hundreds of others of the same kind,
and the graveyards they created keep gradually fill-
ing up. Large numbers of these cowboys meet
death by fighting duels, without the aid of seconds
or other assistants; and either one or both of the
combatants are killed on the spot. There is this
spark of honor exhibited, generally: an armed man
will not shoot down an unarmed one; but will, in
case of a quarrel with an unarmed person, direct him
to go and get a weapon and return. Upon the re-
appearance of the challenged party, the spectators
afford them ample room, and the shooting is com-
menced without further words and kept up until at
least one of the combatants is killed or mortally hurt.
One of the most desperate duels ever engaged in
by any of these fellows was that fought by a Mexican
cowboy named Jesus Garcia and a young Philadel-
phian named Gus Davis at a camp on the . river
Pecos (New Mexico), August 7, 1883, and which
has been described by a correspondent of the New
York Sun, as follows:

Gus Davis, of Philadelphia, came here several months
ago, and was engaged as a cattle-herder by Mr. John Shure,
a wealthy stock-owner. Davis soon showed himself to be a
useful man, and gained the esteem of his employer and the
envy of the other herders. In less than three months he

DUELLING IN AMERICA. QI

had resisted so many temptations to quarrel with his associ-
ates that he was nicknamed " The Northern Coward." One
morning, about three weeks ago, while Davis was on duty
looking after his cattle, Jesus Garcia, a Mexican, saluted
him, as usual, with " Good-morning, Northern Coward."
Human endurance has its limit, and Mr. Davis thought he
had been insulted long enough. The Mexican was at first
surprised at the stand taken by the Philadelphian, but word
brought on word, until each determined that the other
must die. The quarrel soon brought all the neighboring
cowboys to the spot. The mode of combat was speedily ar-
ranged. A chain thirty inches long was securely locked
about their necks. A Mexican dagger (a two-edged knife
six inches long) was given to each of the duellists. The
obliging cowboys then lowered the men into a dog-canon,
a descent of seventy-five feet. There they were to remain
until one killed the other. A key to the lock was given to
each, and no one was allowed to interfere further. The rest
of the cowboys then went to work, as if nothing unusual had
occurred. For some days nothing was known as to the re-
sult of the encounter. Yesterday, however, Davis, weak and
emaciated, returned to camp, dragging after him the lifeless
body of Jesus Garcia. The story Mr. Davis tells is as
follows : " The fight began as soon as we reached the
bottom of the canon. Being locked together, each was
always within reach of the other's knife. After such delib-
eration as the few moments during our descent permitted, I
decided that unless the first blow was fatal the chances were
decidedly in favor of the party assailed. I accordingly
allowed the Mexican to strike the first blow. He plunged
his knife into my side. As soon as I found his arm thus
stretched forward I cut the muscles of his right arm near
the shoulder. Immediately his knife dropped. While he
was stooping to pick up his knife I sent myblade into his
body from the back. Before I could strike again he had
picked up his knife and cut the cords of my arms, so as to
render them both useless. Here we both stood for a few
seconds, when I discovered that his heart had been reached.

92 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

His body soon fell in the death-struggle to the ground.
• The chain was so short that he brought me down with him.
In a few minutes he was dead. I was so weak from loss of
blood that I lay down by his side. We lay there for five
days and nights, until hunger drove me to make a last
effort. I climbed the steep incline of the walls of the
canon and reached the camp, carrying Garcia on my back."

A correspondent of the New York Times, writing
from Silver City (N. M.) in January, 1883, presents
an interesting account of the characteristics of a
number of these romantic fellows of the West, whose
names are as familiar as household words along the
Southwestern frontier:

" 'Tis funny how whiskey scrapes a man's throat when he
is not used to it." The man who used this expression is a
character. The lines which here introduce him give his
pet phrase when recovering from a spree. His throat was
doubtless too familiar with bad liquor to be disturbed with
anything less than a currycomb. He was standing leaning
against the counter of a bar room in Silver City, as he made
the above-quoted remark. It was a typical frontier saloon,
and it was filled with strange characters. Here were two
Indians sitting* on a bench, a couple of drunken freighters
leaning against the wall, "two regular" soldiers half drunk,
two or three hunting-dogs, several Winchester rifles, a pile
of Indian trinkets, and a half-wagon-load of specimens of
silver ore. A board covered with a little red calico and a
half-dozen bottles stood for the bar. Curly Bill was a hard
man, and as he stood taking his whiskey in this rude bar-
room he was a perfect specimen of a rustler. His rude
make-up of rough pants stuck in his boots, blue shirt, red
necktie, and sombrero added to a not over-good counte-
nance much that was picturesque. He had a knife in his
boot, two six-shooters about his waist, and was ready for a
frolic of any kind even at the risk of his life. He was a

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 93

desperado of the dangerous sort, and had killed many a
man. The boys gave him credit for having stocked a pri-
vate graveyard, and he was consequently a hero. The
drink was hardly down when Curly Bill whipped out his
revolver, and, for amusement, shot a hole through the top
of one of the freighters' hats. They then got to bantering
each other about their skill as marksmen, and, walking out
into the yard, they went to shooting silver half-dollars out
of each others' fingers at twenty paces. Curly Bill soon
tired of this monotonous excitement, and asked one of the
soldiers to hold up a silver piece. The soldier agreed, and
twice he sent his bullet against the coin, but the third time,
for pure devilment, he shot the fellow's front finger off.
When the soldier growled about the miss, Curly Bill's re-
sponse was : " Oh, I thought you had been a soldier long
enough." This ended this quiet sport for the day. The
men walked back into the saloon, and I walked up to the
further end of town. A few moments afterward a cry of
fire was raised, and the place where Curly Bill and his
companions were, soon burned to the ground. While the
building was burning the clatter of horse's feet was heard,
and Bill and his companions came riding up the street at a
rattling pace, and the landlord with them. They stopped
at another favorite bar-room, and the landlord who had
been burned out said, " That Curly Bill got to shooting at
the lamp and hit her a little two low and it exploded.
He will pay the damage, though." Drinks were ordered
for all the motley crowd in the bar-room, and they went to
playing Spanish monte, the favorite game in the rude West.
A few days after this Curly Bill barely escaped hanging for
horse-stealing, and left for parts unknown. To-day there
is a price upon his head in almost every Territory. He has
been reported as dead half a dozen times, but he turns up
in unexpected places to vex every community he strikes.
Where he came from and who he was before he became a
desperado no one knows. But he seemed to have had a
fair early training, and to have drifted into this wild life
from a taste for adventure. " Oh, hush !" shouted a long,

94 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

lank fellow, as he jumped upon a table filled with rough
men. The cause of his joy was the words of the dealer of
the keno-bank, calling the number that made him winner of
the pot. " I am a hard man from Bitter Creek, I eats b'ar-
meat, weigh 4000 pounds, smells like a wolf, and the whiz of
bullets is music in my year," yelled the fellow, as he threw
his sombrero off from his villainous-looking countenance.
One of the men who had been less fortunate at the game
hit him a blow under the ear just as he finished speaking,
and he fell like an ox. He picked himself up, looked
quietly around the place, and then said, " Well, this is the
most sociable community I ever struck. Come on, boys,
let's liquor." It cost him five dollars to treat, but the ex-
perience he got was worth it. These two characters repre-
sent the two different classes of men you find on the border.
The man who shouted when he won the pot at the keno-
bank was a braggart. He would boast of his great exploits,
of the horses he had stolen and of the men he had killed,
and would swagger around with an air that would scare any
one but a brave man. But when he met a fighter he always
wilted. He and Curly Bill are fair representatives of the
two classes of hard characters you find on the border.
They all wear the broad-brimmed hats, dress alike, and
have similar ambitions. Their open, reckless life gives
them good health ; desperate dissipation and their animal
spirits often run away with their sense.

Among these desperadoes whom you discover under the
broad sombrero the Spanish first introduced into the south-
western territory you find many peculiar characters — men
who have been raised well and have had great opportunities,
but who grew up to a wild life, and took their lessons of
equity, justice, and humanity from association with the Texas
steer. Russian Bill was a type of the better class, but in
heart and impulse he was like the last man I introduced.
He was highly educated, and spoke and wrote six languages.
He was a " blower," who had committed many crimes in his
mind. But Curly Bill and the brave men along the frontier
never gave him credit for any exploits except with his

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 95

tongue. He bragged so much, however, about his desperate
deeds that one night, while under arrest for some petty
offence, a vigilance-committee took him at his estimate of
himself and sent him to his final account by what the fron-
tierman call " grape-vine route." He died like a coward,
and the people believe that he was never a very bad man.
Sandy King was another desperate character. He was
raised in Western New York, and had a good family. He
came West to make his fortune, and, being an adventurous
spirit, drifted in with the cowboys and became a leader in
their crimes. Like all the rest of these characters, he was
an open-hearted, free-handed fellow, and has many a kind
act set down to his credit among the people of Grant County
(N. M.). He was a companion of Curly Bill, and had shared
with him the bounty and hazards of many a desperate game.
He was very well educated, and was capable of much better
things. The night the vigilantes hung Russian Bill they
performed the same office for Sandy King. He died game.
When he found that death was inevitable, he called to the
lynchers, " Boys, give me a drink ; it will help me on the
road to hell. I reckon this game you are playing is all right.
I have got even with many of your kind while I've lived, and
I don't know why I ought to squeal when you've nipped me."
The nonchalance with which he looked upon death nearly
captured the crowd. But they finally concluded to send him
aloft. They gave him another drink, and when he had fin-
ished it he straightened himself up and said, "Now, boys, I'm
ready for the devil to get his own." How many of these
strange things to civilized people I heard and saw during a
stay of a few months on the southwestern frontier ! A vol-
ume could be filled with interesting reminiscences, good and
bad, of these strange people, whose lives have been bent
from good to bad by their surroundings and the cravings for
the adventures of chance. All men who wear the broad-
brimmed hat are by no means bad. They are rude, rough,
and uncouth, but in most cases brave, generous, and honest,
as the world goes. You rarely get into trouble with any of
them, unless you seek it, and you will meet lots of people

go THE FIELD OF HONOR.

who pass for respectable that have a worse record than even
the characters I have described.

Another newspaper-writer has this to say of Rus-
sian Bill:

His looks would have attracted attention anywhere, but
dressed in the fancy cowboy garb he was particularly notice-
able. His clear-cut features, long, drooping mustache, and
curly blond hair, which fell in curls on his shoulders, made
Russian Bill an object of special interest to strangers.
Three years ago, when the writer first saw him, Russian
Bill was known through southwestern New Mexico as one of
the San Simon "rustlers," a gang of thirty or forty outlaws
that made periodical raids through western Arizona, north-
ern Mexico, and southern New Mexico, stealing cattle and
horses and driving them to the San Simon Valley, where
they were kept until an opportunity offered itself to dispose
of them. Russian Bill was a man of good education ; he
spoke five or six languages fluently, and delighted when-
ever opportunity offered in discussing literature, science, or
art. Of his past nothing was known, save that he was from
Russia. His reputation was not that of a "bad man," but
of being a braggart whose heart was really kind and whose
courage was doubtful. About two years ago the residents
of Shakespeare (N. M.) resolved to free themselves from
the rough element that had for a long time ruled that place.
The next morning twelve men were asked to leave, and
when Russian Bill arrived in town a couple of days later,
accompanied by another rustler named Sandy King, the
citizens decided that the two men should die as an example
to their companions in crime. Accordingly, at about mid-
night, a dozen men entered the room of the Stratford Hotel,
occupied by the rustlers. Before Sandy King and Russian
Bill could offer any resistance they were tied securely, ropes
were thrown over the beam above their beds, and they were
pulled up and left hanging, until they were dead. The next
morning a coroner's jury held an inquest and brought in a
verdict that the men committed suicide by hanging. A

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 97

short time ago the sheriff of Grant County (N. M.) received
a letter from the American consul at St. Petersburg, saying
that the Countess Telfuin was very anxious to learn the
whereabouts of her son, who had been banished for political
reasons, but who possessed large estates. The letter enclosed
a photograph of Russian Bill. Word was sent that the
Count had committed suicide at Shakespeare two years
ago, and the true facts were kept from the knowledge of
his mother.

A letter from Flagstaff (A. T.) to the New York
Tribune of September 9, 1883, presents a felicitous
pen-portrait of Poker Bill, who, it will be seen, col-
lapsed in the presence of the average railway " bag-
gage-smasher" of the West :

Poker Bill is not a John Oakhurst, although he is a pro-
fessional gambler. In fact, my experience goes to show that
gentlemen of John Oakhurst's type are extremely rare on
the frontier. Poker Bill may have been endowed with an
equally exalted spirit, but I regret to state that during my
stay here he has been rudely buffetted by fortune. His place
of business is in one of the dozen rude log-huts burrowed
into the hillside and shaded by the pines. Thence Poker
Bill emerged the other morning, wearing a grim and trucu-
lent aspect, and started rapidly down the so-called street.
The loungers, who sit all day beneath the deer's head nailed
to the front of the chief store, roused themselves from their
patient waiting for somebody to " set up the pizen," and
originated the proposition that "somethin's up." For once
they unwittingly told the truth. Poker Bill took his way
down the track to the depot — a term applied to a freight-car
fitted up as an office. Presently he returned to his cabin,
and when he reappeared his six-shooter was belted to his
side. The loungers became visibly animated. When Poker
Bill was seen to be bound for the depot again, an air of
cheerful expectancy pervaded the group. It was felt proper
that either the justice of the peace or the storekeeper, who

98 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

were sitting on barrels near the bar, should invite the crowd
to " irrigate" in view of the stirring times which had so
suddenly come upon them. Meantime Poker Bill had been
stopped and questioned by a friend, who carelessly drawled
in parting, "That thar station-agent's a bad man." But
Poker Bill would not be deterred. His beady eyes glittered
wickedly and his hand softly caressed the handle of his
revolver. When he disappeared into the depot he looked
the dime-novel picture of a bloodthirsty and invincible
desperado. Among the loungers it was whispered that a
dispute had arisen between Bill and the station-agent re-
garding the payment of charges on an express bundle. A
few bets were quietly made on the question whether the
station-agent would be killed or maimed. The justice of
the peace, although fully alive to the interest of the occa-
sion, recollected business elsewhere, for he had no desire to
enter into a relation unpleasantly antagonistic to Poker Bill.
Suddenly all the patient waiters leaped to their feet, al-
though there had been no sound of shots. Such a sight as
they beheld had never been seen since Antelope Spring was
known to the white man. Out from the door of the station-
agent's car, plunging headlong to the ground, came Poker
Bill, propelled by a terrific kick. He was without his " six-
shooter," his waistcoat had been torn off, and his remaining
clothing had collected most of the dust from the car-floor.
He gathered himself up, dodged under the car and ran up
toward the town, shielding his head with his arms and evi-
dently expecting to be followed by a bullet. There was no
need of explanations. "What did yer do with yer gun,
Bill?" asked one of the no-longer-respectful crowd as he
passed. " I left it," snarled Bill ; and the point was not
pressed, as Bill was known to possess other weapons. He
equipped the justice and two others with shot-guns and
rifles. Thus heavily loaded, the force moved upon the car
and demanded the return of Bill's gun and waistcoat. Hav-
ing obtained these articles, accompanied by much satirical
language from the agent, Bill retired to his cabin. From its
door throughout the day issued a mighty stream of highly

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 99

flavored and picturesquely embellished profanity. Poker
Bill's sun had set and his enemies had seen his fall. Never-
theless the great sawmill in the opening across the track
buzzed on as usual. The cool wind swept down from the
mountains through the pines, but Poker Bill cursed him-
self with exceeding bitterness because he had failed to add
a fifteenth grave to the little " Boot-Hill Cemetery," near the
corral, where eleven out of the fourteen dead came to their
deaths by violence. For the route of the new road which
has opened northern Arizona has, like the course of every
Western railroad, been stained again and again with blood.
Back at Coolidge, five desperadoes held the town in terror
some two years since, until a brief but stirring conflict left
three ruffians dead, one dying and two citizens pierced with
balls. Here at Flagstaff, in the heart of the great pine-
forests, the camps of wood-choppers and tie-cutters offered
a ready asylum to thugs and outlaws. Every new railroad
in the far West has been full of cost to human life. First
come the engineers, daring the perils of Indians and the
wilderness. Then follow the gangs of " navvies," who build
the dump and lay the ties and rails ; a rough, wild set, the
refuse of the cities. With them come swarms of blood-
suckers, gamblers, thieves, and keepers of dance-halls, care-
less whether they win a man's money by a rigged faro-bank,
or " hold him up," or shoot him in the back on a dark night.
No one knows their origin. They disappear on the comple-
tion of the railroad, and no one knows where they go. They
leave a few graves behind them, and these deep woods are
shadowed by many an unknown tragedy. Life at the head
of a railroad is like life nowhere else. The laborers are a
source of profit to every one except themselves. They eat
and sleep in long trains of freight-cars; and their eating and
sleeping fill the pockets of some contractor. They build the
road and receive their wages, and the wages are promptly
transferred to the keeper of the gambling-tent, groggery, or
dance -hall. Finally they are discharged. They return
cooped up like cattle in freight-cars, they make for the
mining-camps, or, provided with a "tie-pass," they pack

100 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

their blankets on their backs and set out on the tramp along
the track. The best of them are kept for the section-gangs ;
the others vanish utterly away. With their departure and
that of their attendant evil spirits a calm succeeds the
storm. The stranded gambler talks mournfully of "the
lively times when the road was here;" but the Eastern
visitor possesses his soul in peace and no longer fears to be
" held up" in the street.

Not long ago a cowboy who had murdered a man
in a New Mexican town, and was pursued for a day
by the Sheriff, returned to the scene of his crime and
compelled the Sheriff to go in his company to all the
saloons in town, and treat him to the drinks, and
after the rounds were made, he mounted his horse
and rode off in safety. What came of trifling with
some cowboys in Wyoming, is thus felicitously told
by the editor of the Laramie Boomerang:

Ben Carter had " heaps of fun," as he expresses it, at Rock
Creek, west of Laramie, the othe^ day. Ben is a typical
Western cowboy — a whole-souled, dare-devil puncher of
steers ; a fellow who will divide his last dollar with a friend,
or ride anything that has not more than four legs and wears
a saddle. Ben has one weak point, however, a fondness for
the sulphuric acid annihilator which Wyoming barkeepers
retail as whiskey, and when he is " full" he is windy and
ready for any harmless mischief. On the day referred to
Ben was at Rock Creek loading stock. A dozen or more
,of his brother-cowboys were in town, and after the
arduous duties incident to crowding twenty more steers
into a car than the builders intended were over, the boys
began to " booze up," and by the time it got dark enough
to light the lamps the saloon-keeper found that he hadn't
any that were fit to do duty as illuminators — the boys
had shot them to pieces. Every time a lamp would fall
the marksman, who assisted at the post-mortem of said
lamp, would cheerfully waltz to the bar and pay for it, and

DUELLING IN AMERICA. IOI

then try again. The lamp market was active for a few
minutes, but the supply was limited. Ben hadn't taken a
hand in the shooting-match as yet, but had made it a point
to drink with the successful marksmen, so that, strictly
speaking, he wasn't sober. Finally, he awoke to action.
Seizing a revolver from a companion and drawing his own,
he sprang to the centre of the room and delivered him-
self of a speech. He told the boys that they ought to be
ashamed of themselves. He was a perfect lady himself, and
it shocked him to witness such disgraceful proceedings. He
had been appointed as a Deputy Sheriff on his last visit to
Laramie, and had decided to arrest every mother's son of
them. The boys protested against such a strange procedure,
but Ben flourished his guns, told them he had the whole
United States at his back, and imperiously ordered them
into an empty warehouse near, the door of which stood
open. The novelty of the thing somewhat muddled the
boys, and without a word they filed into the temporary
prison, and Ben closed the door. He then rustled around
and found several log chains, with which he securely fas-
tened them, and, with the dignity of a high private in a State
militia corps, mounted guard on the outside. The boys ven-
tilated their prison cell as well as they could with what am-
munition they had, and then dropped off to sleep. In the
morning Ben released them, after exacting a solemn promise
to Behave themselves like gentlemen and ladies thereafter.
The boys walked over to the hotel as meek as lambs. While
eating their breakfast they noticed that an unusual amount
of hilarity seemed to prevail in the dining-room. The head
and only waiter laughed boisterously while serving the soup ;
the cook poked his head through the doorway leading to
the kitchen, and drew it back again quickly, and a series
of Comanche war-whoops that were positively painful to
their listening ears, gradually subsiding into a low, mellow
laugh which made the plates on the tables jingle, followed.
Sounds of mirth also floated in from the office, until finally
one of the boys went out to inquire the cause. He came
back presently, and the most ignorant judge of the emotions

102 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

•as shown oy the human features could have told that he was
unutterably mad. He consulted a moment with his compan-
ions, and then called the waiter and ordered a box of " forty-
fours." These were served cold, and the command loaded
their weapons and marched down to the saloon, where they
found Ben Carter. The spokesman, Broncho Bill, then and
there told Ben that he was no gentleman. He had taken
advantage of his friends, and made them the laughing stock
of the community. He had pretended that he was the au-
thorized Deputy Sheriff, when he had no more claim to the
title of Deputy Sheriff than Ben Butler had to the spoons
history says he hypothecated. Believing that he repre-
sented the majesty of the law, they had given him the
respect he deserved. He had insulted them by putting them
in the " jug" over night, and they could only wipe out that
insult by creating a vacancy in the atmosphere thereabouts
of about the size of his body. He must go, and go quick.
Ben is brave enough, but after he had looked over the
crowd, and saw that each man had his hand on his per-
suader, he concluded that perhaps Broncho Bill was right.
He got : and when he had put several hundred yards of
sagebrush and sand between himself and the station, the
boys, having no further use of "forty- fours," emptied their
revolvers. From the agile manner in which Ben was danc-
ing around as he passed swiftly over the brow of the hill
toward Laramie, and the amount of dust rising in little
clouds all around him, it is believed the boys carelessly
pointed their weapons his way while taking the loads out.

What has been termed the cowboy-fight — or a not
dissimilar mode of combat — raged in California from
1849 to 1860, at least in the mining communities of
the Golden State; and it has also been more or less
indulged in throughout the Pacific States and Terri-
tories in sections where mining operations have been
extensively carried on. The street, or bar-room, duel
flourished among members of the gambling fra-

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 1 03

ternity in California for ten or twelve years, and the
whizz of the deadly bullet was oftener heard in those
days than are even the church bells of the present.
The southern counties of California, where for thirty
years there existed an almost unceasing strife among
hordes of disorderly characters, but where there is so
much perfect harmony and contentment now — also
contributed much toward a Golgotha over which
" Resurgam" can never be truthfully written.

It was no uncommon thing in California (as well
as in other Western States), during its early days, for
the real gentleman and the riot-loving desperado to
come together; and it is a prominent fact in the an-
nals of such events that, in a majority of cases, the
former was never known (or seldom the first) "to
weaken." A description of the bar-room duel be-
tween Hicks Graham and Yank Maguire, as fur-
nished the San Francisco (Cal.) Morning Call by a
correspondent in August, 1883, is as interesting as
any and much more thrilling and dramatic than many
similar encounters:

Graham, a backwoods disciple of Blackstone, was practis-
ing law at Montgomery at the time. Yank Maguire came
down from Aurora, where he enjoyed the reputation of a
desperado. He was a big, savage fellow, coarse and over-
bearing in his manners, the very opposite of Hicks Graham,
who was below the medium size, delicate, and gentlemanly.
From the first the two men seemed to hate each other.
There was a natural antipathy between them. Instinct
taught each to see in the other a deadly and dangerous ene-
my. The little town just naturally knew, before Yank Ma-
guire had been forty-eight hours within its limits, that
trouble was brewing between the two men. They had met
at Aurora a short time before the discovery of rich silver
rock in Montgomery district, and came near having a diffi-

104 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

culty there. The fact appeared to be that Maguire, who was
crazy to be thought a fighter, was insanely jealous of Gra-
ham's well-established reputation in that respect. The first
night of his advent into the new camp he got on a jamboree,
flourished his revolver, and swore that no man who wore a
" biled shirt " and a " plug hat " could make him take water.
As Hicks was almost the only one in camp who sported
such evidences of civilization as a white shirt and a silk hat,
of course we all knew that Yank meant him. But he only
smiled at the riotous demonstrations of the big rough, and
quietly walked off and went to bed. From that hour, how-
ever, the town felt that something serious was going to hap-
pen. Strangely enough, in a place where shooting scrapes
were of daily occurrence, Montgomery got excited over the
prospective quarrel between Hicks Graham and Yank Ma-
guire. The death-dealing merits of the men were discussed
very freely, and money was wagered on the final results.
Notwithstanding Maguire 's size and blood-thirsty talk, Gra-
ham was the popular favorite. The little fellow had won
his spurs in many a hard-fought scrimmage, and most of the
miners were ready to bet that he would kill his opponent or
drive him out of camp. Montgomery had, among its cos-
mopolitan population in those days, quite a sprinkling of
Southerners, who believed that the right way for gentlemen
to settle their personal troubles was "according to the
code." Street fights and bar-room encounters were good
enough in their way, but the proper thing was a duel ac-
cording to the code of honor. Aurora bore testimony to
their handiwork in this respect. Time and again had her
high-toned and pugnacious citizens, governed by the true
spirit of chivalry, gone out and shot each other in the most
approved fashion. Why not arrange a regular "affair" be-
tween Maguire and Graham ? The latter was a Pennsylvan-
fan, it is true, but in love for the code duello he could not be
excelled by the most ardent native of the "Sunny South."
With him there could be no trouble, and he at once cheer-
fully acquiesced in the proposal of his chevalier friends to
avoid the vulgar barbarity of a street affray or a saloon ren-

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 10$

centre. Maguire, however, did not take to the thing kindly,
so it was said, and gave his officious interviewers such a
stormy reception as came near starting a riot in the camp.
For this reason, to the sincere regret of not a few, the pro-
posed duel had to be abandoned, and the town was left in a
feverish condition of expectation, impatiently waiting for the
fray. Fortunately, the good folks of Montgomery had not
long to wait. A difficulty among some miners led to a law-
suit before his honor, Judge Caliph, the judicial autocrat of
the place, and Hicks Graham appeared as a lawyer for one
of the parties. Happily, or unhappily, as the fact might be
viewed from different standpoints, Yank Maguire was a wit-
ness against the side represented by Graham, and when this
condition of affairs became generally known it was in the
air that the time had come for one or both to " pass in his
checks," as the sports phrased it. When the belligerent wit-
ness took the stand all eyes were turned upon him. With
an angry glance at Graham, and a suggestive hitch at his
hip pocket, where the handle of a big six-shooter could be
plainly seen, he proceeded with his testimony, and for a time
got along smoothly enough. The cross-examination, how-
ever, was too much for the witness. Repeatedly he was
admonished by the justice to answer the questions and
avoid insulting personalities. Still he was ugly, coarse and
abusive, and indulged in a vicious sneer when Graham
quietly remarked that nothing he might say could make him
forget that he was in a court of justice. At last, losing all
patience, and finding restraint next to impossible, Graham
insisted that the court should take a recess. Immediately on
adjournment, the crowd poured into the " Montgomery Ex-
change," directly across the way, and filled the saloon to its
utmost capacity. While a long line of thirsty souls were
standing before the bar, drinking or waiting to be served, a
cry of " Look out !" was heard, and instantly the sharp and
loud reports of two pistols scattered the crowd in all direc-
tions. Who drew first none could say, but the little one
evidently got in the first shot, for Maguire was seen to stag-
ger and put his hand to his breast. He did not flinch, how-

106 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ever, and both men continued to fire with great rapidity.
At this critical juncture, something was noticed to be wrong
with Graham's pistol. It would not revolve, and in working
with it, the chamber fell out and rolled on the floor. Again
Maguire's pistol rang out, and a bullet-hole through his an-
tagonist's hat showed that the effect of the first shot had
not destroyed his aim, although he staggered around the
room like a drunken man. Coolly stooping down, Graham
picked up the chamber of his revolver, deliberately replaced
it, and began firing again. While fixing his weapon he had
got into a corner at one end of the bar or counter, and Ma-
guire took a similar position at the other end. The fire now
raked the counter from end to end, to the danger and hor-
ror of a number of spectators who had taken refuge from
the flying bullets behind the bar at the beginning of the
fight. With every crack of the pistols was heard the wild
cry of some poor devil in the line of fire. The shriek and
fall of one of the number, a quiet, inoffensive Dutchman
who had nothing to do with the affray, put an end to the
bloody business. The proprietor of the " Exchange," now a
well-known citizen of San Francisco, jumped across the
counter and seized Graham with an iron grip, while others
caught Maguire and wrenched the revolver from his hands.
The result of the shooting was the death of the unfortunate
German, shot through the heart, the fearful wounding of
Maguire, who was sinking fast from a bullet in the breast,
and a slight flesh wound received by Graham. The bar
room duel over, Montgomery resumed its natural condition.
The fight was eminently satisfactory. Both men were game,
but the little one had come out on top. The writer knew
Hicks Graham well in the sage-brush country ; cabined with
him and shared his bed and board. On more than one oc-
casion, while travelling together or watching the stars from
under the same blankets, he talked over exciting scenes in
his turbulent life. Few men ever knew how thoroughly he
despised, in his later years, the reputation of a fighting man.
Such a reputation, he would bitterly remark, is a curse to
any one. Every reckless fool, \vho wants to get his name

DUELLING IN AMERICA. IO/

up as a desperado, thinks he is in duty bound to have a dif-
ficulty with you, while you are expected to resent every
grievance, real or imaginary, with the knife or pistol. I re-
member with what earnestness he said, more than once : " If
I had my life to live over again, nothing short of absolute
dishonor would make me fight anybody !" His reflections
on the past were evidently not of a pleasant character, and
there can be no doubt that he deeply and sincerely regretted
many events in his reckless career. It was really singular
how so quiet and gentlemanly a little man could get into so
many ugly scrapes. Of a genial, sociable disposition, warm
in his attachments, and courteous and obliging to every-
body, it does seem strange that his life should have been so
bloody and desperate. He had domestic griefs which
weighed upon his mind, and, like many another gallant fel-
fow, sought forgetfulness in strong drink. Doubtless this
had much to do with his numerous deadly quarrels, for few
men were more quiet and inoffensive when sober. Peace to
his ashes ! After life's fitful fever may he sleep well.

During the Autumn of 1852, in Los Angeles (Cal.),
Colonel (since a distinguished General in the Con-
federate army, and now deceased) J. Bankhead
Magruder, Third Artillery U. S. A., who was visiting
that city fron San Diego, commenced an evening at
Harry Monroe's restaurant, in company with three or
four other congenial fellows, by ordering a cham-
pagne dinner of an elaborate character. It was not
long after the initial movement of the real old Duff
Gordon sherry from right to left that an exhilaration
set in which was rapidly and radiantly heightened
to a hilarious pitch, the reader may rest assured; so
that, after the " feast of reason and flow of soul " had
got completely under way, the nocturnal wayfarer
might have misinterpreted the medley of mirthful
vociferations for sounds of revelry second only to

108 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

those attributed to the beauty and chivalry of Belgi-
um's capital upon a momentous occasion by the
author of " Childe Harold's Pilgrimage." In other
words, ?an uproarious controversy had quickly fol-
lowed the ample gastronomic discussion, during
which Magruder declared, with his characteristic
suavity, that Andrew Jackson was " the greatest man
who ever trod in shoe leather." Colonel John O.
Wheeler tossed off a goblet of Krug to " the greatest
American statesman, Henry Clay;" while Thompson
Burrill quaffed placidly away to the memory of
'• Daniel Webster, the greatest man the world ever
produced." A certain disciple of Esculapius, who
was present, then arose, as ostentatiously as it was
possible for him to rise, under the circumstances, and
said: "My father, who was Sheriff of Cayuga County
(N. Y.), was the greatest of all Americans !" To
which Magruder replied, vehemently: "Doctor,
you're a damned fool !" The Doctor at once chal-
lenged Magruder to fight, which cartel of defiance
was at once accepted, the combat to take place on the
spot, and over the dining table, from end to end, dis-
tance twelve feet; weapons — derringer pistols. Major
Horace Bell, in his exciting book, entitled "Reminis-
censes of a Ranger," presents his readers the follow-
ing description of the duel:

Wilson Jones, the Doctor's second, got the word, and the
principals, without shaking hands, took their respective
stations, the majestic form of Magruder towering above that
of the diminutive Doctor, who paled and shuddered when
brought face to face with the grim-visaged son of Mars.
All was suspense. The word was to be: Ready! fire! Onet
two, three! At the word "ready," to the dismay of all, the
Doctor blazed away. When the smoke cleared somewhat,

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 109

to the horror of the valiant disciple of Esculapius, his an-
tagonist stood as stiff and defiant as an avenging demon.
The Doctor quailed ; Magruder glared savagely on him for a
full minute. The spectators, spell-bound, looked on with
horrible forebodings. Magruder took two "side steps to the
right," which brought him clear of the end of the table. He
then advanced the "right foot full to the front," with his
glaring eyeballs bent fiercely on the now terrified Doctor.
He then brought the left foot up to the rear of the right heel
and leveled his derringer at the ghastly face of the tremb-
ling Doctor. Then he advanced the right foot as before,
and in this way, with firm and unrelenting tread, he slowly
advanced on the now thoroughly frightened Doctor, who
made a movement toward the door. The spectators inter-
posed, and cut off the possibility of retreat in that direction.
The Doctor tried to flank the Colonel by skirmishing around
the table. Magruder faced to the left, as though moving on
a pivot, and kept the direful derringer aimed directly at the
Doctor's palid countenance. In the excitement the Doctor
ran under the table, crawled through, grasped the knees of
the irate hero, and affectionately embracing them, said :
" Colonel Magruder, for the love of God, spare me for my

family." The Colonel gave him a kick, and said : " D n

you ! I'll spare you for the hangman." And, so saying,
he handed the weapon to his second, and the festivities were
adjourned.

This mode of fighting over a table did not origi-
nate in the "far West," however; for, as early as
1771, the brother of General Delancey, the notorious
barrack-master general of the British army, had high
words one evening with a Charlestonian named
Haley, in a coffee-house near the foot of Broadway,
New York, during which the American called for
pistols, and insisted upon fighting the Britisher in
one of the coffee-rooms across a table. The English-
man was kind enough to accommodate the belliger-

HO THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ent Yankee, and was shot dead as soon as the word
was given. An account of this affair, published in the
New York Evening Post in 1845, says that Delancey
was murdered, as the American discharged his weap-
on dishonestly before his time. Another account
declares that the disturbance took place in South
Carolina, and that Delancey and Haley both fired at
the same time; and that the survivor was defended
by the Pinckneys and Rutledges.

Among the many descriptions of the bloody en-
counter which gave the bowie-knife its name the
writer has seen none so generally and briefly inter-
esting as the account lately furnished the Philadel-
phia Times by a correspondent of that paper, which
is as follows:

A feud had existed for years between two parties of the
parish of Rapides (Louisiana), on Red River. The princi-
pals were Dr. Maddox, Major Wright, and the Blanchards
on the one part, the Curreys, the Wellses, and the Bowies
on the other. A challenge was passed between Dr. Maddox
and Samuel Wells, and the meeting was arranged to take
place opposite Natchez (Miss.), in August, 1827. Hither
the parties repaired with their friends. It was agreed that
no persons should be present but the combatants, their sec-
onds and surgeons. The place of meeting was a large sand-
bar, immediately opposite Natchez. The sand-bar at low
water is of considerable width, bordered above and below
with forest growth ; on the opposite side of this bar were
stationed the friends of each party ; one of these parties
was something nearer to the combatants than the other.
Colonel Crane was the second of Maddox. Between him
and James Bowie and General Currey there had long existed
a deadly feud, and several months before this affair General
Currey shot Colonel Crane with a shotgun, on Bayou Rap-
ids, disabling one of his arms. The parties to the duel ap-
proached the spot selected for the combat from different

DUELLING IN AMERICA. Ill

directions. The preliminaries were soon arranged. The
combatants took their positions and exchanged two shots
without effect, and the difficulty was amicably adjusted.
Bowie was just in the edge of the woods with Generals Wells
and Currey, armed with pistols, Bowie carrying a huge knife.
As the duelling party started to leave the grounds Bowie
and party advanced to meet them. The friends of Maddox
and Crane on the opposite side of the sand-bar, seeing this,
and being furthest from the party, started to run to meet
them as soon as they should reach the retiring combatants.
General Currey was the first on the ground, closely followed
by Bowie. Currey immediately advanced upon Colonel
Crane and remarked : " Colonel Crane, this is a good time to
settle our difficulty," and commenced drawing his pistol.
Bowie did the same. Crane was armed with a brace of duel-
ling pistols, and awaited the attack of Currey. At this mo-
ment Currey was seized by his brother and begged to desist.
Bowie and Crane fired at each other, it is said, without
effect. There were those who said Bowie was wounded.
The latter statement I think most probable, for Bowie
stopped, felt of his hip, and then, drawing his knife, limped
toward Crane, who was watching General Currey. Released
from the hold of his brother, Currey was advancing. At
this moment Crane leaped across a small ravine cut through
the sand by the rain water flowing from the acclivities
above, and, resting his pistol upon his crippled arm, fired at
Currey, wounding him fatally, from the effects of which he
fell. Crane was now disarmed, and Bowie advanced cau-
tiously upon him. Clubbing his pistol he struck Bowie
over the head as he avoided his knife adroitly, and felled
him to the ground. Crane retreated a step as his friend,
Major Wright, advanced upon him, and with a long, slender
spear, drawn from a walking-cane which he carried, attacked
Bowie, who made a pass to parry the spear with his knife, in
which he failed. The spear was of cold iron, and striking
the breast-bone bent and went round upon the rib. Bowie
at this moment seized Wright and fell, pulling Wright down
with and on top of him, and holding him strongly to his

112 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

person. Wright was slender, and by no means a strong
man, and was powerless in the hands of Bowie, who coolly
said to him : " Now, Major, you die," and plunging the
knife into his heart, killed him instantly. This knife was
made by Resin P. Bowie out of a blacksmith's rasp or large
file, and was the original of the famous bowie-knife. When
James Bowie received it from his brother, he was told by
him that it was " strong, and of admirable temper. It is
more trustworthy in the hands of a strong man than a pis-
tol, for it will not snap ; Crane and Wright are both your
enemies ; they are from Maryland, the birthplace of our an-
cestors, and are as brave as you are, but not so cool. They
are both inferior in strength to yourself, and therefore not
your equal in a close fight. They are both dangerous, but
Wright the most so. Keep this knife always with you. It
will be your friend in a last resort, and may save your life."
After this conflict Resin P. Bowie earned this knife to Phila-
delphia, where it was fashioned by a cutler into the form of
a model made by him, and I presume the knife is yet in the
possession of some member of the family. There was no
reconciliation between Crane and Bowie after the conflict,
though Crane aided personally in carrying Bowie from the
ground, and Bowie thanked him and said : " Colonel Crane,
I do not think, under the circumstances, you ought to have
shot me." Almost immediately after the attack of Currey
upon Crane, the fight between their friends became general,
in which there were fifteen wounded and at least six killed,
among whom were Currey and Wright. All the men en-
gaged in this terrible affair were men of wealth and high so-
cial position, and the two parties included almost every man
of fortune in the extensive and wealthy parish of Rapides.
All are gone save Maddox and Wells, both very old, and
still residing in the same parish.

Mr. S. P. Hall, a resident of San Francisco, con-
tributed to the Alia of that city, in January, 1884,
what he claims as a "truthful narrative," which dif-
fered only in a few of the important details of the

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 113

tragedy as chronicled by the correspondent of the
Philadelphia Times, as follows:

The grand fight which gave origin to the bowie-knife, the
fearful fame of which is spread over all countries, occurred
in the month of August, 1827. In that year the writer was
fourteen years old, and stood by the side of his father and
witnessed the fight. The facts were indelibly impressed
upon his memory, and he proposes to give you a truthful
narrative of them : In the year mentioned many persons,
moved by the spirit of adventure, engaged in the speculation
of the rich unentered cotton lands in the States of Missis-
sippi and Louisiana. Among those adventurers were the
brothers Resin and James Bowie, from the State of Mary-
land. They were men of fair education, well raised, as the
phrase goes, and of unshaken resolution. They were men
of good intelligence, imposing presence and excellent phys-
ique, Resin being the elder and more considerate, and
James, the junior, having more of the dare-devil in his com-
position. These men organized a party of land speculators,
which soon came in antagonism with another party who
acknowledged the leadership of Judge Crane, a cultured
gentleman of Rapides parish, Louisiana. He was as brave
and chivalrous as men generally get to be. Between him
and James Bowie a deadly feud existed, resulting from a
personal rencontre (no weapons) in which Judge Crane was
worsted. The members of each party sympathized with
their leaders, and several fights and duels had grown out of
it. Among others, a duel was 'arranged to take place be-
tween Dr. Maddox and Samuel Wells, on the sand-bar oppo-
site the city of Natchez, the former being in the State of
Louisiana, the latter in Mississippi. According to the terms
of the fight, neither Judge Crane nor James Bowie were to
be present. Bowie at the time had his residence in Natchez
(Miss.), and Judge Crane at Alexandria (La.), but was then
stopping at a hotel in the city mentioned. The parties to
the duel met at the place appointed, but influential citizens
from Natchez intervened and prevented hostilities. At this

IU THE FIELD OF HONOR.

place a spring gurgled from the bank, overshadowed by
willows, with benches arranged for the accommodation of
visitors. The parties and their friends thought it a fitting
occasion and place to have a good time, and had cham-
pagne, brandy, cigars, etc., brought over from Natchez, and
sat enjoying themselves, when Judge Crane unexpectedly
put in his appearance and joined in the convivial feeling,
well pleased with the pacification. But another appearance
was shortly to be put in which was to involve direful conse-
quences. Bowie, doubting that Judge Crane would abide
his promise to stay away from the place where the fight was
appointed to take place, placed a spy upon his actions, who
reported to Bowie that he had, with two friends, crossed the
river in a skiff for the scene of expected action. Bowie,
upon learning this much, crossed over on the ferry-boat,
which landed half a mile below, and, all alone, walked up
the bank. The citizens of Natchez, generally, were notified
of the expected fight and had crossed over the river to see
it. As the party quaffed the generous fluids, good feeling
arose as the goblets declined, and everything was tinged
with the rainbow hues of friendly feeling, when a rustle in
the boughs, which overhung the path which led down to
the spring attracted attention, and the manly form of
James Bowie, couchant, to avoid the boughs, met the gaze
of the party. Instantaneously, like a snowflake falling upon
a heated furnace, the friendly feeling disappeared. The
very presence of Bowie meant fight, and it took place be-
tween the high-mettled parties, all of whom were men of
wealth and social standing. Previous to the appearance of
Bowie, Andrew Marschalk, editor of the Natchez Courier, a
Revolutionary soldier highly respected and of strong influ-
ence, remarked to Judge Crane : " Judge, this is a fitting oc-
casion to bring about friendly relations between you and
James Bowie, whom you acknowledge to be a gentleman."
Judge Crane excitedly remarked, quoting from Shakspeare :

" No! No! Ne'er can true reconcilement grow
Where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep!"

DUELLING IN AMERICA. 11$

Scarcely had the words died upon his lips when the " man
of fight " descended the path and stood upon the sand-bar.
Judge Crane arose and fired upon him with a pistol, the ball
passing quite through his body. He staggered and fell.
Judge Crane ran up with a sword-cane and attempted to
stab him. Bowie skilfully warded the thrusts, and putting
forth all his strength, grasped the spear with one hand, and
with the other seized the judge by his cravat, which, ac-
cording to the fashion of the day, men wore tightly secured
around their necks, and drew him down closely upon his
body. Disengaging the spear from the hand of Judge
Crane, he pierced him through the body and heart, and
he died upon the body of his prostrate foe, who fainted
from the loss of blood. As intimated above, the charm of
friendship was dissolved by the appearance of James Bowie,
and the friends of the respective parties separated and fired
upon each other. Six men were killed and fifteen wounded.
Many citizens of Natchez who were present waded into the
water of the Mississippi River, then at a low stage, to escape
the bullets. Dr. Girault, who was present as surgeon of Dr.
Maddox, a man of low stature, also waded in. His friends
afterward jokingly would tell him that at every flash from
the pistols of the combatants he would duck his head under
water until he was nearly drowned. As stated, the ball
from Judge Crane's pistol passed quite through the body of
Bowie, but cut no chord which bound him to life, and his
strong vitality enabled him to recover. He was confined to
his bed for three months, and being a man of inventive
genius, and fond of hunting, he whittled from white pine,
with his pocket-knife, the model of a hunting-knife, and
sent it to two brothers in the city of Natchez, skilful black-
smiths, by the name of Blackman, from Massachusetts, with
instructions to spare no expense in the making, They made
a knife, according to the model, from a broad file or rasp,
such as are used in saw-mills, ornamented with silver about
the handle. This knife the writer has seen James Bowie,
years after the events here written, exhibit to his friends.
A hardware merchant of Natchez, catching the idea, sent a

Il6 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

model of this knife to Philadelphia and had a large number
manufactured, and they were sold rapidly.

After presenting quite a number of characteristic
incidents in the life of James Bowie, Mr. Hall con-
cludes his sketch thus:

Many years after this, a Methodist minister in the town of
Clinton, Louisiana, told the writer this : That he was among
the first preachers sent by the Methodist Conference to
Texas, while it was in its embryo condition, to preach ; that
he crossed the Mississippi below the old town of Fort
Adams, and travelled up Red River, in Louisiana, to get to
Texas. The first day after crossing the Mississippi he was
overtaken by a horseman, dressed in a buckskin garb, armed
with rifle, pistols, and a hunting-knife. They entered into
conversation, and he found his travelling companion an in-
telligent, agreeable gentleman, well acquainted with the
geography of the country. They journeyed together for
several days, one not asking the other his name or his busi-
ness, until they reached a town in Texas which had been
made the headquarters of desperadoes and refugees from
justice from every State. There he gave notice that he
would preach at night in the court-house. At the hour
appointed the court-house was filled with men, only a few
women. He said he gave out a hymn and all sang it and
sang it well ; but when he took his text and attempted to
preach, he was saluted by one with the bray of an ass,
another by the hooting of an owl, and kindred noises. Dis-
liking to leave without preaching, he waited until the inter-
ruptions subsided, for three several times, when his travelling
companion, whom he did not know was present, arose in
the midst of the congregation and said : " Men, this man
has come here to preach to you — you need preaching to, and

I'll be d d if he sha'n't preach to you. The next man

that disturbs him shall fight me. My name's Jim Bowie."
The preacher addeJ that after the announcement of the
name Jim Bowie he never had a more respectful and atten-
tive congregation. It is hardly necessary to say that James

DUELLING IN AMERICA. II 7

Bowie laid down his life at the Alamo, in the State of Texas.
Greece, in ancient times, had her Thermopylae, from which
only three persons escaped. The Alamo was the American
Thermopylae, from whence only one woman and a negro
boy escaped. Travis, the commandant, Crockett and James
Bowie, his subordinates, a trio of heroes ! Patriotism mourns
their fate and memory will bedew their graves with her tears
as long as noble deeds move the human heart with pleasur-
able emotions. In truth, every man who fell at the Alamo
was a hero, because not one asked or expected quarter.
They fought to protect the infant settlements of Texas
from savage destruction.

As a general thing, during the times of which we
write, the favorite weapons with the Alabamians and
Mississippians were rifles and shotguns, which were
seldom used without fatal effect. The favorite weap-
ons of the Creoles, however, were four-sided rapiers;
and, as a matter of course, wounds were frequent and
fatalities few.

Il8 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER VI.

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE.

Fall of a Noted Choctaw Chief — Duelling among the Mexicans —
Mortal Combat of a Mexican Banker and a French Merchant —
The Custom in the West Indies — Code Henri— Restrictions in
Cuba — An Exciting Duel between Soler (a Cuban) and Palacios
(a Spaniard) in Havana — The Japanese Mode: " It is only an
accident, and at best it is only a quarrel between the two
swords."

AMONG many tribes of American Indians duelling
exists according to a fashion entirely their own.'
With many tribes it is necessary that both the com-
batants perish in all cases, thus: A member feels
offended, and demands a combat; the day is fixed and
the tribe assemble; the champions advance, the of-
fended man armed with a rifle or shotgun, and the
offender unarmed; the one without arms uncovers his
breast and receives the missile of death, and the
other, while the offender is weltering in his blood,
presents his weapon to some relative or friend of his
dying adversary, retreats a certain number of paces,
points with his finger to the place where the heart is
seated, and receives the mortal wound.

This mode does not prevail among either the
Choctaws or Cherokees, who fight their duels gener-
ally according to the "code;" or, at least, like many
" pale faces" whom they have seen fall upon the

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. IIQ

" field of honor." And the author is reminded, in
this connection, that in July, 1883, Carpenter, the
celebrated Choctaw Chief, fought a fatal duel near
the Pine Creek Indian Agency (Arkansas), with a
white man named Price. It seems that the two men
got into a quarrel about some trivial matter, when
Price called Carpenter a liar; whereupon the enraged
Chief, after looking calmly into Price's face, ex-
claimed: "Your heart's blood, sir, shall wash out this
insult !" " My blood is yours, sir, when you have the
power to take it!" responded Price, "and I will give
you the opportunity right here and now!" "No, sir,
not now," said the Chief, coldly; " but you must meet
me at this spot to-morrow, without fail." " I'm your
man, my friend, and don't you forget it. I'll meet
you to-morrow, with the good friend I always carry
in my hip pocket, at any moment you name-^when
shall we meet? — make it early, for I have an engage-
ment at the Agency in the afternoon." "When the
sun shines above the top of yon tree," responded
Carpenter, pointing to a wild plum, as he spoke; " at
that hour stand you here and you will see me." They
then separated. The report of the quarrel and pro-
posed duel spread far and wide, and before sunrise
the following morning a large crowd had gathered
upon the spot to witness the strange encounter.
Price arrived first on the field. He was quickly fol-
lowed by Carpenter, who appeared just as the sun
rose above the tree-tops and illumined the open space
upon which Price stood. Both men drew their pistols.
Not a word was spoken. Raising their weapons they
fired almost simultaneously. Carpenter reeled, but
rallying, both fired again. This time Price dropped
dead in his tracks. The crowd pressed forward with

120 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

a wild shout. As they did so the Chief fell on the
ground senseless. A bullet had entered his breast;
blood gushed from his mouth, and he was thought to
be dying. Price had been shot through the heart.
Chief Carpenter was a splendid specimen of Indian
manhood. He was tall and straight and comely. He
was well educated and had natural talents which
placed him head and shoulders above all his Indian
associates.

The Mexicans have not been much of a duelling
people — at least, the upper classes of Mexico have
not indulged in the custom to the same extent that
those of other countries have done, albeit fights with
knives and assassinations have always prevailed to an
alarming degree in all of the States of the Mexican
Republic. The first duel (of which there has been
any record) in that country jtook place in 1521, in
which Nunez, of the staff of Cortez, slew a Mexican
of great fighting renown, after a desperate combat
with swords. Cortez himself, says Prescott, "was
frequently involved in affairs of honor, from which,
though an expert swordsman, he carried away scars
that accompanied him to his grave." Among the
lower classes of Mexicans fighting to the death with
the lariata (lasso) is sometimes practised. Generally,
however, these lower orders settle their disturbances
(assassin-like) with the knife.

In 1851 Senor Trias challenged an American named
Richards for ungentlemanly language concerning his
countrymen in the City of Mexico, and the latter was
shot dead at the first fire. The latest duel upon
Mexican soil took place near Chapultepec, just
outside of the City of Mexico, on the morning of
November 8, 1883, between Mr. de Ghest, of the

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. 121

Mexican National Bank, and M. Ollivier, a resident
French merchant, in which the latter was killed and
the former severely wounded in three places. The
difficulty, says the New York Herald of November
22d, arose out of a dispute at the Peralvillo races
over the possession of some of the seats, and was
aggravated by the fact that several of the disputants
were foreigners. It appears that the British Minister,
Sir Spencer St. John, two American ladies, and Mr.
de Ghest, had been witnessing the sport from the
raised seats on the grand stand. During the custom-
ary promenade between the races the party left their
seats unoccupied, and on their return were surprised
to find that they had been taken by some other
foreigners, among whom was M. Ollivier, a French
merchant. Mr. de Ghest demanded that the intrud-
ers should give up the seats. M. Ollivier refused,
saying that, as the seats were not numbered or
reserved, his party had as good a right to them as
the former occupants. To this Mr. de Ghest replied
that he was a member of the Jockey Club and would
see that the seats were given up. Some friend of Mr.
de Ghest said to him while the row was going on:
"Do not mind these people; they are Barcelonnettes,"
alluding to the town in the south of France whence
many of the French residents of Mexico had come.
On the other hand a friend of M. Ollivier said to Mr.
de Ghest: "You are an insolent fellow, and to-morrow
you will answer to me for this; here is my card."
" What have I to do with your name ?" answered Mr.
de Ghest, excitedly; "I am not in your set and don't
know you." He appealed to the police and caused
M. Ollivier to be ejected from his seat and locked up
in jail. The affair naturally caused great excitement

122 THE FIELD OF HONOR,

in the City of Mexico, partly on account of the dif-
ferent nationality of the chief participants. Mr. de
Ghest is one of the leaders of society in the Mexican
capital, and is connected with the Mexican National
Bank. M. Ollivier was connected with a French firm
of high standing, and was accompanied by French
ladies belonging to the best society in the city. Ex-
citement ran very high in the French colony. The
Colonie Fran$aise demanded the expulsion of Mr. de
Ghest from the French Horse Club and the Cercle
Franchise. A protest against M. Ollivier's arrest was
signed by about two hundred French residents, and
he was finally released from jail by the authorities.
The next day there was a stormy scene at the Mexi-
can National Bank. It appears that Mr. Robert, who
is connected with the house of Ollivier & Co., and is
a director in the bank, demanded the dismissal of
Mr. de Ghest. The latter explained how the affair
occurred to Mr. Robert, but he became indignant and
denounced Mr. de Ghest as a liar. Mr. de Ghest
then handed in his resignation, and said to Mr.
Robert that he would send him a challenge. The
latter, it is alleged, said he would kick Mr. de Ghest
and his seconds out of his house, whereupon Mr. de
Ghest struck Mr. Robert in the face. Mr. Robert
announced that he would begin criminal proceedings
against his assailant. After this scene Mr. de Ghest
challenged M. Ollivier. The challenge was accepted,
and M. Reganon was requested to act as a second.
Not satisfied with this, Mr. de Ghest sent a general
challenge to each of the persons who had signed the
protest against M. Ollivier's arrest. In his letter Mr.
de Ghest says:
I will simply say that I caused a rule which rs enforced

INDIAN'S, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. 123

everywhere to be applied in the case of a person who lacked
common politeness at a public gathering. The group who
took up the quarrel try to bring in the whole French colony,
but the latter should bear in mind that they would disregard
national characteristics if they were to champion those who
affront women, conceal their signatures, and receive blows
without returning them. Now, as regards the persons di-
rectly concerned who have mixed themselves up with the
signers of the protest, I request you to make known to them
and to the person who asserts that I refused to take his card,
that I am at their service in my residence, No. 12 Guardiola
Hotel. J hope that among those unknown signers there will
be found one who will abandon the prudent reserve which
has been displayed so far by the persons concerned, includ-
ing M. Sebastien Robert, who has refused to name his sec-
onds after compelling me to strike him.

As has been stated, the duel took place on Novem-
ber 8. It was fought with swords, and M. Ollivier
was killed. About eight o'clock in the morning Mr.
de Ghest and M. Emile Ollivier, with their seconds,
repaired to a place in the vicinity of Piedad. After
the usual preliminaries the combatants confronted
each other. Thrusts were skilfully parried, but at
length Mr Ollivier wounded his opponent in the
shoulder. They fenced again, and Mr. de Ghest re-
ceived a second thrust, also in the shoulder. At this
moment there was intense anxiety manifested, and
the seconds looked inquiringly at each other. It is
said that M. Ollivier now inquired, " Are you satis-
fied? implying that he was. Mr. de Ghest, who was
angered by the wounds he had received, said, " Go
on. It is not for you to speak; your seconds alone
have that right/ The fight went on, and in a
moment Mr. de Ghest ran his sword through the
breast of his opponent, wounding him mortally. At

124 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the same instant M. Ollivier's sword pierced the neck
of his opponent, inflicting a third severe wound. The
physicians did all that was possible for the wounded
combatants, but M. Ollivier died in a short time.
His remains lay in the afternoon at the French Hos-
pital. Mr. de Ghest was assisted to his carriage and
returned to town.

Duelling in the West Indies, except upon Hayti
and the islands under Spanish rule, used to prevail to
a great extent, although the custom has pretty nearly
died out; and " pistols and coffee" are not called for
at the present day, either by quarrelsome youth or
by "old stagers," with that same reckless demeanor
they used to be in days of yore. Upon the small
French islands, particularly, the " code of honor" was
held in high esteem, both by foreigners and " estated
gentlemen," some thirty, forty, and fifty years ago; and
it was no uncommon thing, in those times, to witness
two or more duels a month, on an average — only a
few of which, however, were attended by fatal conse-
quences. Many a hostile meeting has been precipi-
tated by the wine-cup at the "Cirque," the famous
club-house of Basseterre (the capital of Guadaloupe),
a resort of French army and navy officers, and by
resident planters and merchants of wealth and re-
spectability There was then no law in force against
duelling; so the custom was practised without muni-
cipal restraint or fear of legal consequences. It was
generally understood throughout select society upon
St. Martin that every gentleman must have empha-
sized his polite breeding either by having been
" called out" or of having challenged his man, unless
his social life and business transactions had been
phenomenally serene and satisfactory. There was an

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. 12$

air of perfect refinement and absence of cruelty, how-
ever, in the deportment of St. Martin duellists; and
the bowie-knife, rifle, or double-barrelled shotgun
was seldom ever used as a weapon — the invitations
were generally " pistols and coffee," and the terms
"ten paces and balls thirty-two to the pound."

Among the various methods resorted to in different
countries for the suppression of duelling, none has,
perhaps, been so decisive as that of Christophe, the
black sovereign of Hayti; for in the criminal code
which was formed during his reign, and to which the
name of " Code Henri " was given in honor of him,
" the king particularly forbids, under any pretence
whatever, the officers of the army, and other indi-
viduals belonging to it, to make use of sword, sabre,
pistol, or other arms against each other, wherever
they may be quartered; and every officer, or other
individual of the army, or belonging to it, who shall
be convicted of having fought a duel shall be shot as
a rebel against the king, a violator of justice, and a
disturber of the public peace; and any officer, or
other person, who shall be convicted of having acted
as a second, or even third person, in a duel, and to
have repaired to the place appointed for that pur-
pose in order to assist or sanction a duel, shall be
considered as those already designated, and shall be
shot accordingly." In consequence of the severity of
this law, duels, which were very frequent prior to its
taking effect, were never known during the reign of
Christophe.

Hot-blooded as the inhabitants of Cuba are be-
lieved to be, and quarrelsome, certainly, as any other
class of Spanish, as they are known to be, still there
have been comparatively but few individual differ-

126 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ences settled at the point of the sword during the
present century upon that island — which state of
things is, of course, almost entirely due to the exist-
ing governmental restrictions upon duelling in all its
forms, and to the frowning majesty of a place of con-
finement adjacent to the Cuban capital known as
Morro Castle. As a lesson to gentlemen of wounded
sensibilities, the Captain-General of Cuba, in 1854,
sentenced Sefior Sartorius, the then postmaster of
Havana, and Sefior Gomusio, an officer of the cus-
toms at the Cuban capital, to terms of imprisonment
in Morro Castle and suspension from duties of their
respective offices for their participation as principals
in a duel, although both were severely wounded (the
weapons used being swords).

Of late years there have been numerous hostile
meetings resulting from the turbulent state of politics
which has prevailed upon the island for a long time;
and not long ago a young Spaniard, named Nicholas
Rivero, arrived at Havana, and commenced the pub-
lication of a paper called El Ray o {The Thunderbolt),
and defamed the Cubans mercilessly — to such a
degree, indeed, that the editor of the Palenque, Sefior
San Miguel, challenged Rivero to meet him in mortal
combat. This was on November 3, 1883, says a
special despatch from Havana to the New York
Herald; and on the same evening of the challenge
Rivero was sauntering past the Louvre when a boy
of nineteen, a hunchback, named Guintana, a Cuban
of good family, approached and asked Rivero if he
was the author of the insulting article in the Rayo, a
copy of which the youth held in his hand. Rivero
acknowledged the article, whereupon the hunchback
sprang upon him, crumpled the paper in his face, and

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. 127

knocked him over against one of the tables. With
Rivero was Palacios, a tall, strong young Spaniard.
Palacios was what Mark Twain would call the fight-
ing editor of the Rayo. At Guintana's assault a
tumult immediately arose in the cafe, the habitues of
which are more or less acquainted with each other.
They gathered around the combatants. Palacios
raised his cane to strike the boy, when he was seized
by the neck by a Cuban officer named Angel Soler.
Calling Palacios a coward, Soler thrust him aside.
Intense excitement followed. The scene ended by a
challenge there and then between Palacios and Soler.
It was to be no child's play — passions had risen too
high for that. Palacios was famed for being a good
swordsman, a dead shot, and with a nerve of iron.
"These Cubans want me to kill two or three of
them," he laughed at night, "in order to teach them
manners." Soler had only recently entered the army,
and was still in training. Both were of about the
same age — twenty-eight — and of like physique.
Soler's seconds were instructed to accept no terms
less than a duel to the death, and, in order to bring
that about, to agree, if need be, to whatever terms
Palacios' seconds chose to make. Soler, having the
choice of weapons, chose pistols at ten paces, the
principals to advance five and fire. This was ob-
jected to on the other side as simple murder. Terms
were then allowed Palacios, who chose swords. Soler
insisted that they should be double-edged and
pointed, and after some demur those terms were
finally accepted. Next morning at six the duel was
to be fought at La Chorrera, a small town along the
coast, three or four miles outside Havana. The prin-
cipals rose at five, and, with doctor and seconds, met,

128 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

prepared to take their fatal journey. A terrific rain
poured down, and Heaven seemed to intervene in the
sad folly. But they were bent on battle; so the party
adjourned to the Payret Theatre, right in the heart
of the city, just off the Prado. The Payret was the
finest theatre in Havana. A year ago part of the roof
fell in through the accumulation of rain on its flat
surface, and the place is now in ruins. It is being
rebuilt, and the doors are barricaded. They forced
open one of the doors and entered the artists' dress-
ing-room. The preliminaries were brief. The keen-
pointed blades were drawn, and the duel began.
Palacios, being the more skilled swordsman and
confident of victory, attacked the other in a fury, and
from the first forced the fighting. Soler, cool and
wary, and knowing, his man, acted wholly .on the
defensive. His failure to end the matter as briefly as
he had expected seemed to exasperate Palacios. He
pressed his adversary desperately, but was met with
a firm defence. Not a word was spoken nor a sound
heard, save the .rush of the rain without and the
dish-clash of the steel. Palacios redoubled his
efforts. A parry on Soler's part knocked his adver-
sary's weapon wide aside. A swift, straight thrust
followed instantaneously before the other could re-
cover his guard, and through the left side of the
throat entered the sharp-pointed blade, severing all
the vessels in its passage and issuing clean out at the
other side. It was all over. Palacios fell to the floor,
past the care of doctor or priest.

The mode among the Japanese may be illustrated
by the following example: Two officers belonging to
the Emperor's staff met upon the imperial staircase;
their swords happened to entangle, and words arose.

INDIANS, MEXICANS, CUBANS, JAPANESE. 1 29

Said one to the other, coolly, " It is only an accident,
and at best it is only a quarrel between the two
swords." "We shall see about that," cried the* other,
excitedly; and with these words he drew his weapon
and plunged it into his breast. The other, impatient
to obtain the same advantage, hurried away upon
some errand of service which he was slowly perform-
ing, and instantly returned to his antagonist, who was
already at the point of death. On inquiring if he
was still alive, and being informed of the fact, he also
plunged his sword into his own body, exclaiming,
" You should not have had the start of me if you had
not found me engaged in the service of the Prince. I
die contented, however, since I have had the glory of
convincing you that my sword is as good as yours."

ISO THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER VII.
VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING.

Fatal Encounter between Count de Luz and Duke de Guise near
Paris — Desperate Fight in Arkansas — Colonel Jonah Barring-
ton's Duel with Gilbert in Ireland — Duelling in the Air — Artil-
lery Duels — Scenes before Richmond, Corinth, Charleston, and
Atlanta — Spectacular Duels at Sea — The Kearsarge and Ala-
bama— Bon Homme Richard and Serapis — Huascar and Esmer-
alda — Miscellaneous Modes of Combat — Tournaments and
Jousts — Duels of Fiction and of the Stage.

DUELLING on horseback was not an uncommon
mode of combat two or three centuries ago ; and
especially in Ireland, where there still exist fields
(with the old post-holes) upon which " real old Irish
gentlemen" have fought many furious battles upon
chargers. This mode of hostilities, says Harrington,
" provided that combatants should gallop past each
other at a distance marked out by posts, which
prevented a nearer approach. They were at liberty
to fire at each other at any time from the commence-
ment to the end of their course, but they were com-
pelled to do so at a hard gallop, their weapons
having been previously charged alike with a certain
number of balls, slugs, or whatever was most conven-
ient, as agreed upon. The posts were usually placed
eight or nine yards apart, being the nearest points
from which the combatants might fire. If neither

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 13 1

party were hit during one course tne comoatants
proceeded to a second ; and if it was decided to con-
tinue the fight after the pistols were discharged, they
then either finished with broadswords on horseback
or with smallswords on foot."

During the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, Don
Pedro Velasco and Ponce de Leon fought a fatal
duel on horseback on a narrow causeway near Ma-
drid, and the former was run through the body with
a silver-pointed spear. In 1589 the young Count de
Luz, whose father had been killed in a duel by the
Duke de Guise, challenged the Duke, and the two
noblemen met on horseback near Paris, the Count
mounted on a white palfry and De Guise on a black
stallion. The combat was of a fierce character, and
was concluded by the Duke seizing the sword arm of
the Count, forcing it backwards and plunging his
own sword clear to its hilt through the neck of his
antagonist, who fell from his saddle dead. In 1603
Sir Mathew Brown, of Beachwood Castle (England),
and Sir John Townshend, a distinguished member of
the first parliament of James L, met at Hounslow
Heath, and fought a desperate battle on horseback,
during which each inflicted upon the other mortal
wounds, Sir Mathew expiring upon the field and his
antagonist dying as he was being conveyed to his
home. Two young men (cousins), named Austin
Guthrie and Franklin Meyers, near Black Creek
(Arkansas), who were rivals for the affections of a
young lady of the same town, early in the month of
August, 1883, at first quarrelled and then proceeded
to blows. In a short time afterward they met on
horseback, according to agreement, to fight it out ;
and as soon as they closed they drew their knives

132 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and commenced a contest which lasted ten or twelve
minutes, at the end of which time each had been
fatally hurt. Both were horribly cut about the head
and body, Meyers' left arm having been nearly
severed. The combatants evidently fainted, and
then fell from their horses ; and, although conscious
when found, soon afterward expired. One of the
most interesting duels of this character was that
fought by Colonel Jonah Barrington and a Mr. Gil-
bert, at Maryborough (Ireland), in 1759, the story of
which is felicitously told by Sir Jonah Barrington (a
grandson of Mr. Gilbert's antagonist), as follows :

My grandfather and Mr. Gilbert had an irreconcilable
grudge ; I forget the cause, but I believe it was a very silly
one. It increased, however, every day, and the relatives of
both parties found it must inevitably end in a combat,
which, were it postponed till the sons of each grew up,
might be enlarged, perhaps, from an individual into a regu-
lar family engagement. It was therefore thought better
that the business should be ended at once; and it was
decided that they should fight on horseback, on the green
of Maryborough; that the ground should be one hundred
yards of race, and eight of distance ; the weapons of each,
two holster-pistols, a broad-bladed but not very long sword
(I have often seen my grandfather's) with basket-handle,
and a skeen, or long, broad-bladed dagger ; the pistols to be
charged with one ball and swandrops. The entire country,
for miles around, attended to see the combat, which had
been six months settled and publicly announced, and the
county trumpeter, who attended the judges at the assizes,
was on the ground. My grandfather's second was a Mr.
Lewis Moore, of Cremorgan, whom I well recollect ; Gil-
bert's was one of his own name and family — a captain of
cavalry. All due preliminaries being arranged, the country
collected and placed as at a horse-race, and the ground kept
free by the gamekeepers and huntsmen mounted, the com-

r A RIO us MODES OF FIGHTING. 133

batants started, and galloped toward each other. Both fired
before they reached the nearest spot, and missed. The
second course was not so lucky. My grandfather received
many of Gilbert's shot full in his face; the swandrops pene-
trated no deeper than his temple and cheek bones ; the
large bullet fortunately passed him. The wounds not being
dangerous, only enraged old Jonah Harrington ; and the
other being equally willing to continue the conflict, a fierce
battle, hand to hand, ensued ; but I should think they did
not close too nearly, or how could they have escaped with
life? My grandfather got three cuts, which he used to ex-
hibit with great glee ; one on the thick of the right arm, a
second on his bridle-arm, and a third on the inside of the
left hand. His hat, which he kept to the day of his death,
was also sliced in several places ; but both had iron scull-
caps under their hats, which probably saved their brains
from remaining upon the green of Maryborough. Gilbert
had received two pokes from my grandfather on his thigh
and his side, but neither dangerous. I fancy he had the
best of the battle, being as strong as, and less irritable than,
my grandfather, who, I suspect, grew toward the last a little
ticklish on the subject — for he rushed headlong at Gilbert,
and instead of striking at his person, thrust his broadsword
into the horse's body as often as he could, until the beast
dropped with his rider underneath him ; my grandfather
then leaped off his horse, threw away his sword, and putting
his skeen, or broad dagger, to the throat of Gilbert, told him
to ask his life or die, as he must do either one or the other
in half a minute. Gilbert said he would ask his life only
upon the terms that, without apology or conversation, they
should shake hands heartily and be future friends and com-
panions, and not leave the youths of two old families to
revenge their quarrel by slaughtering each other. These
terms being quite agreeable to my grandfather, as they
breathed good sense, intrepidity, and good heart, he ac-
quiesced ; and from that time they were the most intimately
attached and joyous friends and companions of the county
they resided in.

134 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

There have been quite a number of duels fought in
the air — all but one, however (that between M. de
Grandpre and M. de Pique, near Paris, May 3, 1808,
in which the latter was killed), so far as our informa-
tion goes, having grown out of reconnoissances by
military aeronauts, a description of which is pre-
sented in Cassell's " Illustrated History of the
Franco-German War," as follows :

Few balloon voyages can compare, for exciting and peril-
ous incidents, with one which was performed at the time of
the siege of Paris, by the well-known M. Nadar. That gen-
tleman left Tours for Paris with government dispatches at
six in the morning. At eleven he was within view of the
capital, and, while floating about three thousand metres
above Fort Charenton, a second balloon was observed on the
horizon. M. Nadar at once displayed the French flag, and
the other responded by exhibiting the same colors. Gradu-
ally the two balloons approached one another, being drawn
in the same direction by the same current of air. When
they were separated by only a short distance, several explo-
sions were heard. The strange aeronaut continued to fire
shots at M. Nadar's balloon, the Intrepide, which began to
descend rapidly. The French flag had by this time been
taken in by the other balloon, and the Prussian colors were
exhibited instead. Those who were watching the affair
from the French below, and who now saw the character and
object of the pursuer, cried out that Nadar was lost. But
they were mistaken. He had scrambled from the car up
the network of the balloon, on the first shot from the
enemy, apparently to stop a hole made in the tissue ; and he
now descended as the balloon righted itself, and, on a quan-
tity of ballast being thrown out, again rose high into the air.
Shots were then fired in rapid succession from the Intrepide
into the Prussian balloon, which suddenly sank to the earth
with headlong rapidity. On reaching the ground a detach-
ment of Uhlans, who had watched the combat from the

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 135

plain, picked up the fallen aeronaut, and rode off to the
Prussian outposts. M. Nadar then descended in safety at
Charenton.

What may properly be termed artillery duels (on
land and on sea) are inevitable occurrences, nowa-
days, during the progress of wars. The engagement
of the Federal war vessel Kearsarge (Captain Wins-
low), and the Confederate war steamer Alabama
(Admiral Semmes), off Cherbourg (France), June
19, 1864, may be referred to, perhaps, as one of the
most brilliant and magnificent naval duels between
wooden vessels of the present age, both as regards
preparation for and performance during action; while
a no less conspicuous and much more important
"affair" was the "hostile meeting" in Hampton Roads
(Virginia), March 9, 1862, of the little Ericsson
Monitor (Captain Worden) and the formidable Con-
federate ram Merrimack (Captain Buchanan), just a
short time after the latter had destroyed the Federal
war-vessels Congress and Cumberland. Undoubtedly
the most desperate and bloody encounter which can
be referred to was that during the American Revolu-
tion between the Bonhomme Richard (Paul Jones, of
the U. S. Navy), and the Serapis (Captain Pearson, of
the British Fleet), a part of the engagement being
" yard-arm to yard-arm." This was a naval duel in
every sense of the word. In this connection may be
mentioned the fact that Stephen Decatur, U. S. N.,
challenged Sir Thomas Hardy, of the British Navy,
during the war of 1812, to meet the United States and
Macedonian with the frigates Endymion and Statira,
which Hardy declined, although that officer, in turn,
proposed to fight the Macedonian with the Statira,
which proposal, however, was not acceptable to the

136 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

gallant Decatur. The most notable as well as the
most desperate affair between ironclads was the fight
in 1879 between the Peruvian Htiascar and the
Chilian Admiral Cochrane, during which the former
was whipped and captured. Previous to this engage-
ment the Huascar (Don Miguel Grau) had met and
sunk the Chilian Esmeralda (a wooden vessel com-
manded by Don Arturo Pratt) in an encounter — off
Iquique (Chili), May 21, 1879 — the particulars of
which have been glowingly described by a number of
English and Spanish writers. During the civil war
in the United States, artillery duels were very fre-
quent between Federal and Confederate batteries —
conspicuously so in Charleston harbor and near
Vicksburg; and also in front of Atlanta, Richmond,
and Corinth, and at many other strategic points in
our country made historic during four years of war
by episodes and achievements too numerous to
chronicle here. From the time of the Battle of
Shiloh (April 6 and 7, 1862, to the night of the
evacuation of Corinth (April 30, 1862), and from
the date of the Battle of Peach-tree Creek (July 20,
1864), in front of Atlanta, to the Battle of Jonesboro'
(August 31, 1864), the writer saw many artillery
duels in which two or more batteries would engage
each other at a distance of- a mile or more apart some-
times for several hours, when otherwise it would be
as quiet in camp nearly as upon a Sabbath in some of
the most orderly New England villages.

There are many other modes of combat which may
be incidentally mentioned, but which hardly come
under the head of duelling, however: In Persia men
meet in mortal combat armed with maces, and batter
away at each other until one or the other is van-

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 137

quished. Zulus meet in mortal combat with assegais.
The natives of Patagonia fight each other with slings,
carrying round stones generally weighing a pound
each, which they hurl with tremendous force and with
remarkable accuracy. Prize-fighting, or boxing,
originated among the Romans, and combatants often
met each other wearing gloves loaded with metal, and
generally with fatal consequences. In Tuscany,
Florence, Sienna, Vicenza, Pisa, and Leghorn, up to a
late day, certain classes met either with armed or un-
armed fists to settle their disturbances. During the
early part of the eighteenth century one Figg taught
cudgelling and pugilism in London; and Broughton,
who succeeded Figg, educated men for the prize-ring,
and is known to-day throughout England as the
father of the English school of boxing.

" Pfcrring" (shin-kicking), which originated in
Wales, is practised a good deal at the present day
among the coal-miners of Pennsylvania. A Philadel-
phia correspondent of the New York Sttnday Mercury
presented to that paper an extended account of a
"purr" which took place at Port Richmond (Penn.),
in January, 1883, from which is taken a description of
the first two rounds:

At two o'clock the men appeared, wearing Lancashire
shoes toed with copper, having submitted their feet for in-
spection to show that there were no protruding nails, and
James gave the word to purr. Grabby advanced cautiously,
and appeared to forget about the shoulder-straps until his
second reminded him of it. He took hold with apparent
unwillingness, and then began the most brutal and savage
contest that two men could engage in. For fully five min-
utes they sparred with their feet in a manner that was sim-
ply wonderful. Blows were countered and returned with the

13$ THE FIELD OF HONOR.

same skill and rapidity as shown by men fighting with their
fists. Not once in that time did either man more than touch
his opponent's skin. Then McTevish, taking a firmer hold
on his opponent's collar, lifted his left foot and, after keep-
ing it poised for a moment, make a straight toe kick for his
opponent's right knee. Grabby deftly avoided the blow by
spraddling his legs far apart, and with almost inconceivable
quickness brought his left foot around and caught McTevish
on the outside of the right calf. The flesh was laid open
almost to the bone, and the blood spurted out in streams.
McTevish never uttered a word. At the same instant that
his own leg was cut he gave Grabby what is known as a sole
scrape. Beginning at the instep and ending just below the
knee-pan, Grabby 's left shin was scraped almost clear of skin.
Both men were evidently in pain, and angry. They kicked
and countered a dozen times again without doing any dam-
age. Then Grabby, by some mishap, lost his hold on his
opponent's shoulder-strap. In attempting to grasp it again
he lifted his eyes for a moment, and before he could ^cover
himself the calves of both his legs were laid open by a
double-foot kick. In return for this he succeeded in deliver-
ing a terrific kick on McTevish's knee, causing him to drop
to the ground like a log, pulling the other kicker on top of
him. The seconds rushed forward and separated the men
and took them to their corners to bind up their wounds.
The first go or round occupied sixteen minutes. When the
call of purr came again the purrers hobbled to the centre and
took another hold. They were, indeed, a pitiable-looking
pair. McTevish's legs, although bound up in plaster, were
bleeding freely, and the exposed places looked like beef-
steak. His opponent's shins had been both scraped clean of
the flesh, and the blood was oozing out from between the
strips of plaster. Without any preliminary sparring Grabby
made a vicious straight kick at his opponent's lame knee,
bringing him to grass again before he had time to think.

The " forehead fight," a brutal combat inherited
from the old Turks, still survives in some districts

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 139

among the Tartars of the Crimea. A duel of this
savage kind, says some writer, took place a short
time ago in a Crimean village. The report of it is
given by a physician who was called to attend the
defeated combatant. The two foes take their stand
at measured distance from each other, with their
heads bent forward; then at a given signal they rush
at one another, butting forehead against forehead,
like two goats. The remainder of the duel is fought
wholly with the forehead; neither blows nor kicks are
permitted, as the man who uses any weapon except
his forehead is disgraced. In the recent duel blood
streamed from the forehead of both the semi-savages;
nevertheless, they continued butting at each other
with ferocious passion, until at length one of them
fell exhausted to the earth. He gathered up all his
remaining strength to draw his knife from his girdle,
and with one determined stroke he cut a wide gash
across his throat. The physician states that the act
of suicide on the part of the beaten man is to be re-
garded as a direct consequence of the injury done by
the fearful concussion of the brain.

The forehead fight (or butting) is largely practiced
by low negroes in America and England, while the
higher grade of colored persons settle their differences
with the razor. Negro barbers, coachmen, servants,
waiters, traders, restaurant-keepers, stevedores, dan-
dies and sports throughout the United States carry
the razor as an implement of warfare, just as many
white men carry the pistol or knife.

The Chicago News lately had an interview with a
negro policeman touching the razor as a weapon, thus:

The razor is becoming an obsolete weapon among the black
people on the levee, said a colored officer of the Harrison

I4O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Street police station. The young bloods have mostly de-
parted from the traditions of the plantation, and now if one
of them wants to " get even" with anybody he generally pro-
vides himself with a revolver. Of course it doesn't follow
that he attempts to do any shooting. Frequently he merely
carries it around in his pocket and brags about it, and shows
it to his friends in the saloons. After a few days he pawns
it or gets arrested for carrying a concealed weapon. No, the
old days of carving cutlets out of a man with a razor have
nearly gone by. Two or three times a year, maybe, some
particularly vicious black man slices somebody with a dozen
gashes each a foot long, but that sort of thing isn't consid-
ered good form nowadays. How did colored people come to
adopt the razor as a weapon ? Well, the slaves on the plan-
tations were generally not allowed to own guns or pistols.
It was against the law for any one to sell them ammunition.
Many of them could get razors easily. They got accustomed
to carrying razors, and many of those who moved north,
after the war, brought razors in their pockets, sleeves, or
stowed away in the legs of their boots. To carry razors had
become a sort of a tradition with the bloodthirsty ones.
How is an attack made with a razor? Rough-and-tumble,
any way to get there. If the man who is attacked doesn't
turn and run, he gets slashed in the face and arms, or both.
If he tries to run away he is likely to get a rake in the back
which will lay open the flesh so wide that the surgeon can
look through the man's ribs into his interior like a small boy
peeping through the pickets of an orchard fence. A razor is
a terrible weapon. I would rather face a revolver than one
of them any day.

A late number of the Sioux City Journal presents
the following description of a duel without arms:

One of the most remarkable fights on record occurred re-
cently between Loveland and Honey Creek, two small sta-
tions between Missouri Valley and Council Bluffs, on the
Chicago and Northwestern Railroad. Duggan Points and
Will Moss engaged in a mortal combat over the rival claims

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 141

to a woman. Points was killed, and Moss is supposed to be
mortally injured. The fight was without arms, and in the
presence of a large number of spectators, who permitted the
fearful contest to go on until it terminated in the death of
one of the combatants. The particulars of the brutal affair
were not fully learned by the parties who brought the news
to this city from Missouri Valley. As far as could be ascer-
tained, it appears that about a year ago a young woman
named Sallie Craig, living between Loveland and Honey
Creek, was the sweetheart and promised bride of William
Moss, a young farmer who resided in Loveland. In a few
months it was agreed that they should be married. Before
the wedding day arrived, however, trouble arose between the
lovers over the somewhat too attentive presence of Duggan
Points, also a young farmer, who resided near Honey Creek.
Moss and the girl quarrelled and separated, and his rival
was thereafter for a time her beau. Subsequently the first
lover and the girl met again and partially made up their
differences. This enraged Points, who had come to regard
her as his own, and he sought to pick a quarrel with Moss
and in some way get an excuse for putting his hated rival
out of the way. The men met on two occasions during the
past three months, and each time had a quarrel, and would
have fought, but were prevented from doing much damage
by the circumstances and parties who separated them. At
a dance about ten days ago the rivals again met and came to
blows. They were again separated, and the girl was appealed
to to determine the question by choosing the one she liked
best. She was unwilling to do so, but said she would go
with the one who proved himself to be the best man. It was
accordingly agreed that a time and place should be fixed,
and there the men should fight it out, the one who was
whipped to forever relinquish all claims to the hand of the
cause of the trouble. The dispute by this time had been so
widely talked of by the people of both Loveland and Honey
Creek that a natural jealousy between the two places easily
caused the citizens of each to take sides. The place of the
fight was agreed upon as half way between the respective

142 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

residents. A man from Loveland seconded Moss, and
Points' brother acted as his second. The fight was not to be
conducted according to any specified rules, but in the most
approved rough-and-tumble style. About sixty people were
on the ground, among whom was the girl over whom the
contest was caused, to witness the brutal affair. The seconds
stood with cocked revolvers in hand and warned no one to
interfere. The men commenced fighting fiercely. They
used fists, heels and teeth; and in clinching and tumbling
about rolled over a large area of ground. The fight lasted
fifty-five minutes, and throughout was one of the most brutal
character. It was brought to a fatal conclusion by Points'
strength entirely giving way, and then Moss, with the last
efforts of his madness, stamped upon his prostrate foe and
crushed in his breast and kicked in his head. The specta-
tors at this overpowered the seconds and dragged the men
apart. Points was dying when picked up, and expired soon
afterward. Moss had been severely bitten by his antagonist,
having had two fingers, an ear, and his nose taken off, and
was in a deplorable condition from other injuries.

Tournaments (or mock duels) seem to have origi-
nated in Germany during the year 819, and were first
introduced to dramatically commemorate important
royal or military events, but soon degenerated to such
an extent that they were rigidly prohibited by Church
and State. From noo to 1605 the tournament among
the French was most popular, although it commenced
to decline after the death of Henry II., in 1559. This
monarch, who excelled in every exercise of chivalry,
was peculiarly fond of tournaments, and gave a splen-
did succession of them at Paris on the marriage of his
daughter to Philip II., King of Spain. The lists ex-
tended from the Palace of Tournelles to the Bastile,
across the street of St. Antoine. During the first two
days the king broke several lances with lords of his

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 143

court, in ail of which he showed extraordinary vigor
and address. On the third day of the tournaments
(June 30, 1559), towards the close of the evening,
and before the conclusion, Henry betrayed a great
inclination to try his prowess against the Count de
Montgomeri, Captain of his Life Guards, who had
formerly wounded Francis I., and was distinguished
for his superior address and tact in combats of this
character above any nobleman in the kingdom.
Catherine de Medicis entreated the king not to re-
enter the lists, but he resisted her solicitations, saying
that he would break one lance more in her honor.
Montgomeri accepted the challenge with great reluc-
tance; Henry, however, commanded him to obey, and
even fought with his vizor raised; but authors are
not quite agreed whether it was raised intentionally
or flew open by a blow from Montgomeri's lance in
an encounter which was so violent that the count's
lance broke against the king's helmet. The former
then fought with the stump which remained in his
hand, and with it had the misfortune to strike the
king so violent a blow under the eye as threw him to
the ground, and deprived him instantly of both
speech and understanding, though he lived eleven
days afterward. This sad circumstance occasioned
the decline of tournaments in France, while the
wounding of Francis de Bassompierre by the Duke of
Guise, in 1605, brought about its total suppression.
Tournaments were introduced into England during
the reign of Stephen, in 1135, and were very popular
among English and Scotch noblemen for several hun-
dred years, during which time many illustrious persons
lost their lives. It was finally suppressed in England
in 1600. Tournaments were very popular in the States

144 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

of Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina as late as
1851, but were never maintained with that reckless-
ness and chivalric display which characterized their
existence in European countries. Quite a number of
tournaments were given at Santa Monica (Cal.), in
1874-5, similar to those given in Maryland and Vir-
ginia twenty-five years before. Jousts differ from
tournaments not essentially, except that the latter
were always understood to be friendly engagements,
or mock duels, while the former were generally hos-
tile encounters by mounted lancers, intent on inflict-
ing serious or mortal wounds.

We cannot dismiss this portion of our subject with-
out referring to the duels of fiction and of the stage —
many of which, however, are not purely fictitious,
being founded on historical incidents and anecdotes.
There is nothing more exciting or delightful in the
whole catalogue of Thespian entertainments than a
stage duel; from the " blood-and-thunder" broad-
sword combat in the " French Spy," which so enlivens
the "gods," to the artistic encounter with foils in the
" Corsican Brothers," which never fails to entrance
even the most genteel theatre-goers. Shakespeare, the
greatest of all dramatic writers, presents many scenes
of mortal combats in his plays; and in our mind's
eye we can now see the little sleepy atom of humanity
in the old Bowery pit — tired to death, nearly, of the
long speeches in Richard III. — entreating the more
robust urchin at his side to "Wake me up when Kirby
dies." Bulwer's " Claude Melnotte" makes neat but
short and entertaining work of the suspecting " Col-
onel Damas," while Ned Adams' duel in the "Dead
Heart" was simply matchless, and was worth sitting
the whole play through to see. "Led Astray," "Ca-

VARIOUS MODES OF FIGHTING. 14$

milla's Husband," " Frou-Frou," and " Les Horaces"
all contain splendid duelling scenes; and those who
have witnessed Forrest, Booth, Murdoch, Scott, Perry,
Eddy, McDonough, Adams, Sullivan, Kean, Daven-
port, Wheatley, Fechter — or even Barrett, Keene, or
McCullough — in Shakespearean and other stage duels,
have received impressions which will forever remain
upon their minds. Descriptions and engravings of
duels in fictitious works, while they are not, of course,
so exciting or so impressive as stage encounters, are
generally very delightful reading, and are seldom
" skipped." And it is a noteworthy fact that there
are but few authors of fiction of note who have not
embellished their productions with scenes of mortal
combat, of a character purely imaginary or other-
wise— conspicuously, Sue, "Sand," " Ouida," Dumas,
Miihlbach, Bulwer, Marryatt, Thackeray, D'Israeli,
Scott, Lever, Irving, Cooper, James, and many other
charming romancers.

" Comedy and Tragedy," the new play which W.
S. Gilbert has written for Miss Anderson, is essen-
tially a one-part piece, and is founded on a story
which Mr. Gilbert wrote for Routledge's Christmas
Annual for the year 1869. The heroine is Celine, wife
of Phillip de Quillac, an actor of the Theatre Francais,
in the year 1745. Celine was an actress, and captivated
the Due de Richelieu, who tries to have her abducted,
but fails. The main incidents of the drama turn
upon a duel scene. Her husband and Richelieu are
fighting in the garden while she is entertaining a
number of friends with specimens of her powers as an
actress. She imitates "comedy" while the clashing
of swords is heard in the garden, and suddenly be-
comes alarmed, fearing that her husband will be

146 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

killed. She pleads to them to save her husband.
They think she is playing tragedy and applaud her,
and the more earnestly and terribly she begs of them
to save her husband, the more they applaud her "act-
ing" of tragedy, as they think it is. At last one of
the company sees that she is in earnest and opens the
door to go to the scene of the fight, when her hus-
band stands before her uninjured, and informs her
that the Due de Richelieu is wounded to the death.

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. 147

CHAPTER VIII.
CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN.

English Clergymen — A Buccaneer Parson and his Duel — Atti-
tudes of Other " Holy Men" — A Brilliant but Unfortunate
Preacher — Duelling among Women — Desperate Duel between
the Countess of Polignac and Lady de Nesle at Versailles —
Two Ladies of Quality Fight at Paris — Other Affairs among
Women — Heroism of the Countess de St. Belmont — The
Heroic Agnes Hotot — Youthful Affairs — White and Black —
Brother and Sister — Men and Women.

To those who have never heard of such a thing,
the statement that ministers of the Gospel have in-
dulged in the polite luxury of killing their fellow-
beings in duels will cause surprise. But such is the
case; and, as late as 1799, the Reverend Henry Bate,
an Episcopal minister, had fought and killed three
men in duels. He died in 1824, holding a high posi-
tion in Ely Cathedral, England. A description of
this man's life shows him to have been a brilliant but
profligate fellow, although a parson. He was a dead
shot, but was " winged " at last by Captain Stoney
Robinson, who was also dangerously wounded by
the unclerical parson — a lady having been the cause
of the trouble. In 1815 the Reverend Mr. Bate (or
Dudley — as he had taken the name of Dudley in
1784) was made a baronet. Two of his wrangles
and duels were over actresses and another on ac-
count of articles he had written besmirching the

148 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

character of the Countess of Strathmore. In 1782 an
Episcopal minister named Bennett Allen challenged
and killed a Marylander named Lloyd Dulany.
The duel took place in Hyde Park, London, a short
time before midnight, and was fought with pistols at
eight paces. Dulany fell to the ground and raised
himself almost like a flash, and then tottered back-
ward and fell into the arms of his second, Henry
Delancy, of Hagerstown (Md.), mortally wounded.
The difficulty was caused by the publication of
anonymous articles in a London newspaper reflecting
upon Dulany and other American loyalists, and a
subsequent publication of a card in the same paper
calling the writer of the articles a liar, a scoundrel,
and a coward. Allen attempted to quit the country
the day following the duel, but was arrested, and
convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to six
months' imprisonment in Newgate. In 1764 the Rev-
erend Mr. Thomas Hill was challenged by Cornet
Gardner, of the " Carabineers," for ungentlemanly con-
duct, and was killed at the first shot.

Perhaps one of the most interesting anecdotes of
these Christian fighters, who seem, at times, to have
altogether forgotten the Sermon on the Mount, is*
the one about Doctor Blackburn, who was, in the
early part of his life, an active buccaneer in the West
Indies — for even buccaneers could not do without a
parson. And during one of their cruises, as the
story goes, the first lieutenant, having a dispute with
Blackburn, told him that if it were not for his gown
he should treat him in a different manner. "Oho!"
exclaimed the parson, " that need be no hindrance ;"
and, stripping off the garment, he added: "Now I
am your man!" At this it was agreed that they

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. 149

should fight on a small island near where their ship
lay, and that the one who fell should be rolled into
the sea by the survivor, that it might seem as if,
while walking on the cliff, he had lost his footing
and tumbled in. The lieutenant fell, to all appear-
ance as if shot dead. Blackburn at once rolled the
prostrate man down the cliff; but, just as they
reached the last shelf of the declivity, the lieutenant
recovered sufficiently to cry out, " For God's sake,
hold your hand!" "Aha!" said Blackburn, "you
called just in time, for in another moment you would
have been in the sea." This same parson and buc-
caneer was afterward made Archbishop of York ;
and when Sir Charles Wager heard of the promotion
he said: "What, my old friend Dr. Blackburn created
Archbishop of York ? I ought to have been preferred
to it before him, for I was the elder buccaneer of the
two."

Notwithstanding the many edicts issued by the
Catholic Church, Cardinal de Retz once challenged
a priest of high birth at the altar. It is said of this
"holy man" that he was one of the most noted duel-
lists of the seventeenth century, and was the hero of
thirteen hostile meetings, in each of which "there
was a lady in the case." Cardinal Norris once ac-
cepted a challenge to fight a noted Jesuit named
Macedo, in the forest of Boulogne, but the meeting
was interfered with by the Pope; and Macedo, it is
said, nearly died from grief in consequence. Joachim
Murat, afterward King of Naples, and one of the
deadest shots that ever lived, fought his first duel
while occupying a high ecclesiastical position as the
Abbe Murat — the cause of the trouble being a
pretty maiden of Toulouse.

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

The writer has no knowledge of such duelling
scenes among American clergymen, although he has
met "members of the cloth" who carried pistols and
were known as excellent shots. He calls to mind a
young Kentuckian, of most profligate habits, who
preached at St. Athanasius' Church, in Los Angeles
(Cal.), in 1868, who could whip out a six-shooter and
knock the spots out of the six of diamonds at twenty
yards, or ring the bell at a shooting-gallery with a
rifle twelve times in succession. He was a brilliant
young minister, but a slave to intoxicants; and died
from the effects of intemperance shortly after having
retired from the rectorship of a church at Elkhart
(Ind.), in 1879. The last words of this gifted minis-
ter— uttered while at the very threshold of death —
are so full of startling pathos, and so painfully illus-
trative of the course of so many who have looked too
frequently upon the delicious nectar in its blush,
that we present it here, trusting that it may not be
without its lesson to those who are too heedless of
the possible consequences of too much "drink:"

But now the struggle is over. I can survey the field and
measure the losses. The demon tore from around me the
robes of my sacred office and sent me out churchless and
godless, a very hissing and by-word among men. After-
wards I had business, large and lucrative, and my voice was
heard in many courts pleading for mercy, justice and right.
But the dust soon gathered on. my books and no footfall
crossed the threshold of the drunkard's office. I had
money, ample for all necessities, but it took wings and went
to feed the coffers of the devils which possessed me. I had
a home adorned with all that wealth and the most exquisite
taste could do. The devil crossed its threshold and the
light faded from its chambers ; the fire went out from the
the holiest of altars, and leading me from its portals, de-

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. 151

spair walked forth with me and sorrow and anguish lingered
within. I had children — beautiful, to me, at least, as a
dream of the morning — and they had so entwined them-
selves around their father's heart that no matter where he
might wander, ever it came back to them on the wings of a
father's undying love. The destroyer took their hands in
his and led them away. I had a wife whose charms of mind
and person were such that to see her was to remember, and
to know her was to love her. For several years we walked
the rugged path of life together rejoicing in the sunshine and
sorrowing in the shade. The infernal monster would not
spare me even this. I had a mother, who for long years
had not left her chair, a victim of disease, and her choicest
delight was in reflecting that the lesson taught at her knee
had taken root in the heart of her youngest born and that
he was useful to his fellows and an honor to her who bore
him. But the thunderbolt even reached there, and there it
did its most cruel work. Other days cured all but this.
Ah, me ! never a word of reproach from her ; only a tender
caress, only a shadow of a great unspoken grief gathered
over the dear old face ; only a trembling hand laid more
lovingly upon my head, only a closer clinging to the cross,
only a piteous appeal to Heaven if her cup was at last full.
And while her boy raged in his wild delirium two thousand
miles away, the pitying angels pushed the golden gates ajar,
and the mother of the drunkard entered into rest. And
thus I stand, a clergyman without a church, a barrister with-
out brief or business, a husband without a wife, a son with-
out a parent, a man with scarcely a friend, a soul without
hope — all swallowed up in the maelstrom of drink !

If women, as a general thing, do not countenance
and have never countenanced, modern duelling, and
are naturally averse to all systems of individual com-
bats— for varied and sometimes heroic reasons — still
they have their womanly sympathies at play, either
upon one side or the other, in all encounters and con-

152 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

troversies where they may be interested, however
trivial or majestic the difficulty or its cause. During
the existence of judicial duelling in European coun-
tries, ladies of rank were always to be found among
the respectable spectators, and there have been in-
stances of the presence of women upon hostile fields
since the prohibition of judicial duels, particularly in
Italy and France. There are also records of hostile
encounters between women — conspicuous among
which was the duel with pistols between Lady de
Nesle and the Countess of Polignac in 1721, in the
gardens of Versailles (France). The ladies had in-
dulged in a most disgraceful quarrel two evenings
before at a grand fete at the Palace, over the Due de
Richelieu — that wondrous character in the history of
France — during which Lady de Nesle, losing all con-
trol of herself, had sprung like a tigress upon her
rival, and attempted to tear a diamond necklace from
the Countess's neck. Failing in this, however, she
snatched the blush roses from their nest in the snowy
bosom, and flung them in the face of her rival. Up
to this time, says some English writer, the Countess
of Polignac had kept down by a powerful effort the
mighty rage which was inwardly consuming her, but
this last indignity destroyed even outward calmness;
and, casting aside all further reserve, she attacked
Lady de Nesle in the same way she herself had been
assaulted. In a moment jewels and flowers and rib-
bons and kices strewed the floor, and there is no tell-
ing to what extent the extraordinary exhibition would
have gone had not the enraged amazons been sepa-
rated by the Marquis de Malbuisson and Mademoi-
selle Nathalie de Condacet. Out of this grew the
duel, the Countess of Polignac being the challenging

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. 153

party. The ladies met at six in the morning, in July,
1721, and fired one shot at each other without effect.
Their seconds (the Marquis de Malbuisson and the
Comte de Penthievre for Polignac and M. de Remusac
and Vicomte D'Allagne for de Nesle) then rushed in
to prevent further hostilities; the fair demons, how-
ever, would not be appeased, but called for a change
of pistols, and again blazed away — this second time
with satisfactory effect, for the Marchioness fell dan-
gerously wounded by a bullet in her left side, while
the Countess was just quietly touched in an ear.

A duel took place at Paris, January 31, 1772,
between Mademoiselle de Guignes and Mademoiselle
d'Aiguillon (two ladies of quality), who had quar-
relled about precedency at a soiree, and retired to a
garden adjacent to the scene of disturbance, and
fought with knives until both were wounded — the
former in the arm and the latter in the neck. It is
recorded of Mademoiselle Moussin, a French prima
donna, that, after killing three men in duels in the
woods near Paris, by sword, she fatally wounded her
fencing-master, Serane, and fled to Brussels, where
she domiciled with the Elector of Bavaria for a brief
period. Lola Montez was also skilful with both pis-
tol and rapier, but it does not appear that she ever
engaged in anything of a hostile character above the
dignity of a street fight. She once challenged a jour-
nalist at Grass Valley, Cal., to meet her with pistols
according to prevailing rules governing such meet-
ings ; and, upon his refusal to do so, thrashed him
with a cowhide upon a public street. In 1845 she
was a witness in the trial of Mons. Bouvallon for
killing Mons. Dujarier, at Paris, and said, in her testi-
mony: " I was a better shot than Dujarier; and, if

154 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Bouvallon only wanted satisfaction, I would have
fought him myself." Dujarier was the friend of Lola
Montez, and in his will written the evening before his
death he bequeathed the (afterwards) Countess of
Lansfeldt one hundred thousand francs. On the 2ist
of August, 1777, Mademoiselle Leverrier (a young
lady of good family), who had been jilted by a navy
officer named Duprez, met the latter in the street in
Paris, and handed him a pistol and told him to
defend himself; at the same time she drew a weapon
and shot her false one in the face, while he discharged
his pistol in the air. An extract from a Georgia
newspaper, published in 1817, says:

Last week a point of honor was decided between two ladies
near the South Carolina line, the cause of the quarrel being
the usual one — love. The object of the rival affections of
these fair champions was present on the field as the mutual
arbiter in the dreadful combat, and he had the grief of
beholding one of the suitors for his favor fall dangerously
wounded before his eyes. The whole business was managed
with all the decorum and inflexibility usually practised on
such occasions, and the conqueror was immediately married
to the innocent second, conformably to the previous condi-
tions of the duel.

A Buffalo (N. Y.) paper of August, 1853, gives an
account of an arrest of Catherine Hurley and Jane
Hall, "who had met on the toll-bridge on Ohio
Street, in the presence of a vast assemblage, to fight
a duel with Allen's revolvers." No other accounts of
similar performances have come under the observa-
tion of the writer.

A very interesting anecdote, however, touching
female heroism, may be related of the Countess de St.
Belmont : When M. de St. Belmont, who defended a

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. I$5

feeble fortress against the arms of Louis XIV., was
taken prisoner, his intrepid wife, Madame la Comtesse
de St. Belmont, who was of a most heroic disposition,
still remained upon the estates to take care of them.
An officer of cavalry having taken up his quarters
there without invitation, Madame de St. Belmont sent
him a very civil letter of complaint on his ill-behavior,
which he treated with contempt. Piqued at this,
she resolved he should give her satisfaction, and sent
him a challenge, which she signed " Le Chevalier de
St. Belmont." The officer at once accepted the chal-
lenge, and repaired to the place appointed. Madame
de Belmont met him dressed in male attire. They
immediately drew their swords, and in a short time
the heroine disarmed him, when she said, with a
gracious smile : " You thought, sir, that you were
fighting the Chevalier de St. Belmont, but you were
mistaken ; I am Madame de St. Belmont. I return
you your sword, sir, and politely beg you to pay
proper respect to the request of a lady in future."
The heroic woman then took her departure, leaving
the vanquished officer covered with shame and con-
fusion.

The most singular combat, says an English writer,
by which arms were ever gained, was one which hap-
pened in the family of Hotot. The family of Dudley,
in Northamptonshire, bears for a crest a woman's
head, with a helmet ; her hair dishevelled, and her
throat-latch loose. The occasion of this crest was
singular. In the year 1390, Hotot, having a dispute
with one Ringsdale, about the title to a piece of land,
they agreed to meet on the disputed ground, and
decide it by combat. On the day appointed Hotot
was laid up with the gout ; rather than he should

156 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

suffer in his honor, or lose his land, his daughter
Agnes armed herself cap-a-pie, mounted her father's
steed, and went to meet Ringsdale at the place ap-
pointed. After a stubborn fight she dismounted her
adversary, and when he was on the ground she
loosened her throat-latch, lifted up her helmet, and
let down her hair upon her shoulders. Agnes after-
wards married into the Dudley family ; and, in honor
of her heroic action, her descendants have always
used the above-described crest, with the motto, Galosa
spes salutis.

Among the youthful "affairs of honor," which have
been settled upon the field, are two that deserve
mention here : That meeting in England, in 1825, by
Cooper (a son of the Earl of Shaftesbury) and Wood
(a nephew of the Marquis of Londonderry), who first
fought with swords, and then with their fists, until
Cooper was killed ; and that affair in Poland, in 1851,
between two boys aged respectively thirteen and
seventeen, with pistols, in which the former was
killed, and the survivor and the two seconds, aged
fourteen and fifteen, were arrested, tried, and ac-
quitted.

There came pretty near being a modification of
the Virginia code during the political campaign of
1883 in that State, and there would have been,
surely, had William Flanagan — one of Senator Ma-
hone's lieutenants — proceeded as promptly to an
acceptance of the cartel of defiance sent him by
the negro whom he had assaulted as he did to knock
said colored man and brother down for expressions
of political difference. It has been stated that Sena-
tor Mahone, in launching his readjuster craft, took in
the Senegambian as a social equal ; and the point is

CLERGYMEN AND WOMEN. 1 57

made, therefore, that the white adherent aforesaid
committed political hari-kari by declining to meet the
colored F. F. V. on the "ground of race, color, and
previous condition of servitude." The New York
Times, of August 29, 1883, discusses this slightly
mixed affair felicitously, thus :

The quarrel between Mr. William Flanagan, a candidate
for the Virginia Legislature, and a chivalrous colored person
whose name is not yet announced, bids fair to modify the
Virginia code of honor. Mr. Flanagan, having knocked the
colored man down for differing with him in political opinion,
was challenged to fight a duel by the aggrieved man and
brother. Mr. Flanagan not only refused to fight but appealed
to the law for protection. Of course, Mr. Flanagan bases
his refusal Jo give the colored man the satisfaction of a gentle-
man on the ground that the code is silent in regard to colored
challenges, and that hence a challenge sent by a colored man
can be ignored. But it is always open to a colored man
whose challenge to fight is treated with disdain to post his
enemy, and it is well agreed among Virginia gentlemen that
to be posted is worse than death. In case Mr. Flanagan is
posted, his only course will be to have a difficulty with his
enemy and shoot him on sight. But where is the difference
between a difficulty and a duel, and how can a man refuse to
fight a duel with an enemy with whom he does not disdain to
have a difficulty? If the colored challenger of Mr. Flanagan
is arrested, he should at once bring proceedings against Mr.
Flanagan under the Civil Rights bill. Mr. Flanagan, in dis-
criminating against his challenger on the ground of color,
has clearly violated the principles of the Civil Rights bill,
and should be prosecuted to the extent of the law. His
conviction would establish the principle that a white man
must either accept a colored man's challenge, or abandon
duelling altogether — a principle that would very soon render
the Virginia duel obsolete.

A despatch from Nashville (Tenn.), of March 7,

158 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

1884, gives a description of a fatal duel between a
brother and sister, with knives, probably the only event
of the kind on record:

Meagre details have reached here of a terrible affair which
took place last night at Baker Station, seven miles from here,
on the Nashville and Southeastern Railroad. The facts as
far as learned are that Jack Hirsch, a young man living
at that place, had been on bad terms with his sister
Rosa for some time. Several nights ago the brother and
sister got into a quarrel, when Rosa cut Jack quite severely.
This affair was quieted down until last night, when they be-
came involved in another quarrel, and agreed to fight it out
with knives to the death. She had a pocketknife and he a
caseknife. They fought in a room of the house where they
lived until Rosa was cut to death. Her brother then took
her out and buried her. Hirsch learned that* a neighbor
named Horton knew of the tragedy, and said to one of his
friends that he wanted to leave before the officers of the law
heard of the deed. He went to the station, purchased a
ticket for Texas, and left on the first train that passed. The
Hirsch family were formerly of this city, where their father
was engaged in business.

A North Carolina vendetta is described in a de-
spatch dated Shelby (N. C.), January 7, 1884:

A terrible and fatal knife combat took place about fifteen
miles from here this morning. For some years past a ven-
detta has existed between the Lepaugh and Runyan families,
both of which have large connections. Philip Lepaugh was
this morning driving his wagon to a saw-mill, when Craige
Runyan, accompanied by his father and brother, made an at-
tack upon him. They pulled Lepaugh from his wagon and
cut and hacked him with bowie-knives, inflicting some terri-
ble wounds. They left him for dead in the road. As they
were fleeing, the wounded man's two sons-in-law came up,
and he urged them to follow his murderers and avenge his
death. They immediately galloped after and overtook the

CLERGYMEN- AND WOMEN.

Runyan party. A desperate hand-to-hand conflict ensued.
G. McSwain and Reuben and Joseph Runyan were soon
lying in the road with ghastly wounds. Masters McSwain
and Craige Runyan were the last two to stand up, and they
cut each other literally in shreds. The former, early in the
conflict, had his left eye cut from the socket. Some farmers
came up in time to see them grovelling in the road cutting
at each other, although they had not strength to stand up.

The following account of a street-duel between a
man and a woman was telegraphed from Hanford,
Tulare County, Cal., on October 30, 1883:

M. H. Stewart, the man who shot three times at his sister-
in-law yesterday in Hanford, because he could not extort
money from her, is presumably a very bad man. A few
weeks ago he was arrested for firing five shots inside his
sister-in-law's house, but as there was no evidence to prove
that he had shot at any one, he was fined $50 and costs and
turned loose. Mrs. M. A. Lyle is a widow with one child, a
girl about six years old. She came to Hanford about six
weeks ago and opened a millinery and dress-making establish-
ment. She had plenty money, apparently, to pay for all she
bought, and to all appearances acted the perfect lady. Stewart
came up a few days after, as he claimed, for the purpose of
starting a lumber-yard. One evening he went to Mrs. Lyle's
house while drunk and noisy. Mrs. Lyle ordered him to
leave. This is the night he fired the five shots. When arrest-
ed for this he made Constable Beckwith a present of the
pistol, stating that he never would carry another. About
two weeks ago, being again under the influence of liquor, he
used very vile language on referring to Mrs. Lyle, calling her
everything but a respectable woman. Some man in the party
resented the insult, and pistols were drawn by both, but Stew-
art was disarmed by bystanders, and the others then quieted
down. Yesterday morning Mr. Stewart and a lawyer named
Irwin, who, by the way, up to this time was counsel for Mrs.
Lyle, called at her house. In answer to their knock, Mrs.
Lyle appeared and asked what was wanted. Mr. Irwin said;

l6o THE FIELD OF HONOR.

" I demand of you fifteen hundred dollars in the name of
Mr. Stewart, and if you don't give it up, I will attach every-
thing you have." Looking up at Stewart, Mrs. Lyle asked,
"Is that so?" Stewart nodded "yes," at the same time
going for his pistol, Mrs. Lyle being ready with her pistol
about the same time. Who fired the first shot it is difficult
to tell. No two agree about it. Mrs. Lyle says she doesn't
know who fired first. Stewart put his pistol close to her
head and fired, the ball missing her and going through the
rear wall of the house, the powder burning her face. Mrs.
Lyle put her pistol directly into Stewart's face and pulled
the trigger, but the cartridge would not explode. On pull-
ing the second time her hand was struck down by Irwin,
the ball entering the fleshy part of Stewart's leg above the
knee. Mrs. Lyle then ran out at the front door and into the
street. Stewart followed, braced himself behind and against
one of the awning posts, and deliberately fired two shots at
her retreating figure. Mrs. Lyle still had her pistol in her
hand. Some one called to her to shoot the old villain, when
she turned and again levelled her pistol at him. He then
started to run down the sidewalk. When opposite Philip &
Sweet's store William Camp held a double-barrelled shotgun
on him and ordered him to drop his pistol. This he did in
a hurry, after which both parties were arrested.

DUELLING IN THE DARK. l6l

CHAPTER IX.
DUELLING IN THE DARK.

Night Combats — The Campbell-Boyd Encounter — De Richelieu
and De Lixen's Midnight Duel — Senator Jackson's Last Affair
— Lebre and Duprez — Aldworth and Buckingham — Fatal Mid-
night Duel in the Snow in New York — Desperate Fight Between
Byron and Chaworth — Henry Grattan and Isaac Corry — Fatal
Meetings of British Officers by Candle-light — Exciting Moon-
light Encounter in New Mexico — What Came of Expectorating
on the Boot of a New Yorker in a Southwestern Town — Modern
Moonlight Methods in Virginia — Captain Coote and the Earl of
Warwick — Garden Fight Between John Wilkes and Lord Tal-
bot — The Famous Duels of Richard Brinsley Sheridan and
Captain Thomas Mathews.

NIGHT combats have been frequent in Europe, and
also in the United States. In 1821, in London (Eng.),
a barrister, named Christie, and the editor of the
London Magazine, Mr. Scott, fought a duel, so-called,
at Chalk Farm, and the latter was killed. The origi-
nal trouble occurred between Mr. Scott and Mr.
Lockhart, the latter-named gentleman at that time
editor of BlackwoocTs Magazine ; and, it seems, Scott,
who had been challenged by Lockhart, and who had
declined to accept, was called upon by Christie, and
the two quarrelled, and subsequently agreed to meet
the same evening to adjust their difficulties according
to the " code of honor." The fight took place at ten
o'clock, during the full of the moon, and Scott fell

1 62 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

mortally wounded at the first fire. Christie was
arrested and charged with wilful murder by a coro-
ner's jury, but at the trial, a short time afterward, he
was acquitted.

In 1721, Captain Chickley and Lieutenant Stanley,
while disputing in a mess-room in a town near Dublin
(Ireland), agreed to fight with small swords in a dark
room the following evening. Stanley was an adroit
swordsman, but was run through the body by his
antagonist in a few minutes after the commencement
of the fight.

Major Campbell and Captain Boyd, officers of the
Twenty-first Foot (British army), fought a duel, with-
out seconds, in the parlor of an Irish inn, at Newry, a
short time before midnight, in January, 1807. Dur-
ing the dispute Campbell challenged his brother
officer to fight at once, but Boyd preferred that the
meeting should take place the next day. Campbell
then taunted his comrade, and insinuated that he was
displaying the white feather. The result was that
they left the garrison where they were quartered
unaccompanied by friends, and fought as stated —
Captain Boyd receiving a mortal wound, from which
he died in a day or two. Campbell was convicted of
murder the i3th of August following, and executed
on October 2. His wife, who belonged to a family
of high standing, made a desperate effort to secure
royal clemency ; but, as is known, without success.
Boyd's last words were: " Campbell, you are a bad
man ; you hurried me in a most wanton way, and
have mortally wounded me in a fight of your own
making and not according to established rules. I
wanted to wait, and have the matter put in the hands
of friends, and you would not let me." This terrible

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 163

arraignment by the dying man was as effective as the
death-warrant, itself, and carried conviction before
indictment. In a letter which Campbell left for pub-
lication, he said: "I suffer a violent and ignominious
death for the benefit of my countrymen, who, by my
unhappy exit, shall learn to abhor the too prevalent
and too fashionable crime of duelling." The writer
once met a gentleman who was present at this execu-
tion. Campbell was acknowledged to be one of the
handsomest and bravest officers of the Twenty-first
British Foot. While of an excitable nature, when
angered, it is said of him that he was generally far
more amiable and much less disagreeable than Boyd,
although they had long been on terms of mutual dis-
like of each other. The night before the execution
Mrs. Campbell had managed to perfect methods of
escape, as it was pretty generally understood that,
although no royal mercy could be extended, no par-
ticular means of vigilance had been adopted. His
noble wife, who had planned the escape, reminded
him of his heroic conduct in Egypt, of his family
name, and of the unheeded recommendation of mercy
by the jury which pronounced the fatal words. But
he only replied: "The greatest struggle of all is to
leave you, my darling ; but I am still a soldier, and
shall meet my fate like a man." And so he refused
to further dishonor himself, although the guard was
asleep, the doors of the jail were unlocked, and horses
and confederates were close at hand. He passed the
following morning in prayer, and at the proper time
ascended the stairs of the execution room with a firm
step and without escort. There stood before him
nineteen thousand sympathizing men with heads
uncovered ; and among them the Fusileers, with

164 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

whom he had intrepidly charged the enemy upon the
burning sands of Egypt. The hum of a single bee
might have been heard in that respectful crowd, as
Campbell addressed it. " Pray for me," was all the
poor soldier said; and, while the diapason of an
impressive "Amen" went up unbroken by a single
other utterance, or even whisper, the unfortunate
man let fall his own cambric handkerchief as a signal
that he was "ready," and simultaneously he dropped
through the dreadful trap and went off on that uncer-
tain pilgrimage to the unknown beyond.

The notorious Due de Richelieu, of France, who
fought so many successful duels, and who seemed to
wield a magician's sword, met the Prince de Lixen —
whom he had purposely insulted on account of the
hatred entertained for the latter by Madame du
Rosiere — near the trenches of Philipsbourg, in 1719,
at midnight, during a storm, by the light of torches
held by brother officers. As the story goes, De Lixen,
who was a General in the French army (and a very
tall man), had had a horse shot from under him
during an engagement; and seeing a pony near,
jumped upon him and rode into the presence of De
Richelieu (who was also a General of that time), who
burst into a loud laugh, and exclaimed: "No wonder
we lost the day, when we have mountebanks for
generals. Behold the horsemanship of the great
Prince de Lixen, who keeps his feet close to the
ground for fear of falling from his saddle." The
Prince heard De Richelieu's voice and laugh, and too
well knew what it meant, and the source of its
inspiration. " I' If insult the villain in no uncertain
way upon the first opportunity," murmured De Lixen.
The next day, De Richelieu, whose command had

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 165

been the last to retreat from Philipsbourg, came into
the presence of Prince de Conti (the commanding
officer), with dishevelled hair, powder-stained face,
and deranged toilet. His rival took this occasion to
carry out his quiet threat of the day preceding, and
said, sarcastically : " It is a matter of much surprise
that the Due de Richelieu should come into the pres-
ence of gentlemen with the hair and dress of a mas-
querader." " I did not retreat so hurriedly from the
field as some of those officers who appear here in
toilettes more elaborately prepared, your highness,"
exclaimed De Richelieu; and then, turning to De
Lixen, he continued: "I shall now go and purify
myself, Prince, and in an hour you shall hear from me."
And so he did, in the shape of a challenge, which was
accepted; after which, arrangements were made and
agreed upon that the two gentlemen should meet
each other in the trenches at midnight. They met
and crossed swords at exactly twelve, and in ten
minutes the magical weapon of De Richelieu had
flashed through the heart of his twentieth victim, and
the survivor, stooping over the dead Prince, said:
" Let us carefully bear his noble body with all honor
to camp. It is the fortune of war, gentlemen, and
may be our turn next." In a short time afterward De
Richelieu went to Paris to acquaint his inamorata
with the intelligence that he had removed one of her
troubles from the world forever. But what was his
astonishment to discover that the frail and faithless
Madame du Rosiere had fled with an English noble-
man to London.

Some few years ago, Major Ben Perley Poore, then
Washington correspondent of the Boston Journal,

1 66 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

sent that paper the following account of a midnight
duel upon an island in the Savannah river:

Among the many bloody duels on record as having been
fought by Congressmen was one in which James Jackson, of
Georgia, who had been and who was afterward a United
States Senator, was the challenged party. He was an English-
man by birth, but he went to Savannah when a lad, studied
law, was a leading Freemason, and fought gallantly in the
Revolutionary War. He killed Lieutenant-Governor Wells,
of Georgia, in 1780 in a duel/and was engaged in several
other " affairs of honor," until he finally determined to
accept a challenge on such terms as would make it his last
duel. So, upon his next challenge, which was from Colonel
R. Watkins, also of Georgia, he prescribed as the terms that
each party, armed with a double-barrelled gun loaded with
buckshot and with a hunting-knife, should row himself in a
skiff to designated points on opposite sides of the Savannah
river. When the city clock struck twelve each should row
his skiff to a small island in the middle of the river, which
was wooded and covered with underbrush. On arriving at
the island each was to moor his skiff, stand by it for ten
minutes, and then go about on the island until the meeting
took place. The seconds waited on the main land until
after one o'clock, when they heard three gunshots and loud
and angry cries. Then all was still. At daylight, as had
been agreed upon, the seconds went to the island and found
Jackson lying on the ground insensible from the loss of
blood, and his antagonist lying across him, dead. Jackson
recovered, but would never relate his experience on that
night, nor was he ever challenged again. He died in Wash-
ington city while serving his second term as United States
Senator, March 19, 1806.

In 1728, a young gentleman named Benjamin
Woodbridge was killed in a duel with swords,
late at night, on Boston Common, by Henry

DUELLING IN THE DARK. l6/

Phillips, after a short combat. Phillips, who was
not hurt, made his escape from the city the next
day, and later turned up in France, where he
died in 1729.

Eugene Bonnemere, in his " Historic des Pay-
sans," tells the story of how a peasant, by the
name of Lebre, who lived in the south of France,
got more than even with a sergeant of the Royal
Guard (which was quartered near Lebre's cabin).
It was toward the end of the seventeenth century;
and the sergeant, presuming upon his gallantry and
manly beauty, and knowing the proverbial weak-
ness of some women for even non-commissioned
officers of his profession, took occasion to pay
marked attention to Lebre's young and pretty wife;
which, while being strictly agreeable to dainty Mrs.
L., was highly unsatisfactory to the incensed hus-
band; who, at last, gave Mr. Sergeant Duprez a piece
of proper advice, and was promptly knocked down
for his pains. Lebre at once challenged his antago-
nist, who declined to recognize a -common peasant
as his equal; and, shutting Lebre out of his own
cottage, took immediate possession of it and its
pretty matron. In a day or two, the sergeant quit
the place for good, and Lebre returned, sold all his
effects, packed the erring madame off to her father's,
enlisted in the army, and was seen no more in that
neighborhood for upwards of eight years. He
fought through two campaigns bravely but without
a scratch, and by gradual promotion reached the
rank of sergeant. "Aha!" cried Lebre, joyfully, at
the end of six years' service, " Sergeant Duprez, Ser-
geant Lebre is your equal ! I shall seek you out, you
villain, and punish you for the wrongs I suffered at

1 68 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

your hands six years ago." Lebre was two years in
finding this man. And when he did find him, they
were at the point of sitting down at the same dinner-
table, with a dozen other officers of about uniform
rank. As soon as the repast was over, Lebre arose;
and, addressing Duprez, inquired: "Suppose, sir, a
man should give you a blow, what would you do?"
" I would return it and challenge him to fight," re-
sponded Duprez. " Take that, then," exclaimed
Lebre, dealing his old enemy a tremendous blow,
which staggered him considerably; and, then, ad-
dressing himself to his other comrades, he recapitu-
lated the story of how Duprez had knocked him
down for defending his wife, and thereafter refused
to fight him on the ground that he was not Duprez's
equal. " Now, Sergeant Duprez," ejaculated that
fellow's assailant, turning round and facing his
enemy, " you and I are equal. I have returned the
blow you gave me eight years ago, and now chal-
lenge you to fight for your life." And as quick as
lightning the two sergeants drew their weapons, and
Duprez was killed in three minutes, the duel taking
place by candle-light.

In 1719, in London (Eng.), Captain William Aid-
worth, of the army, and Owen Buckingham, member
of Parliament, met, and dined, and quarrelled, and
fought, all in one evening. It was so dark that they
could not see each other, and they were so thor-
oughly-well intoxicated that it did not make much
difference whether they did or did not see each
other; but, all the same, there was one less member
of Parliament the following morning, for Bucking-
ham was found by some friends shortly after the
fight, pierced to the heart with his antagonist's ra-

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 169

pier, and Aldworth near by very drunk and covered
with wounds.

University Place, New York (N. Y.), was the scene
of a fatal duel, one cold, snowy night in the winter
of 1804, the parties to the combat being William
Coleman, editor of the New York Evening Post (an
organ of the Federalists), and Captain Thompson,
Harbor-Master of the Port of New York. Thomp-
son, who had made quite an effort to provoke Cole-
man, remarked freely that he had no fight in him,
and that if slapped well on one side of his face, he
would only be too happy to present the other side for
similar treatment. Coleman, after making sure that
Thompson had used the language attributed to him,
challenged the offender, who accepted, designated
pistols as weapons, and named eleven o'clock as time
of meeting, and at or near University Place the scene
of battle. Each party had surgeons and seconds,
and agreed, as it was snowing at the time, to fire at
each other at twelve yards. Both fired the third
time, when Thompson was heard to exclaim: "My
God ! I have got it !" and, reeling sideways, fell mor-
tally wounded into the snow, and died a short time
after having been conveyed to his residence. The
dying man made a statement in the presence of a
number of friends to the effect that the duel and his
death were the consequences of his own quarrelsome
character and rashness, and his last words were for-
giveness of Coleman, who, he believed, had no intent
to kill.

In 1765, while dining at the "Star and Garter,"
Pall Mall, London (Eng.), with a Mr. Chaworth, a
famous duellist, William (the fifth Lord) Byron —
great uncle of the author of " Childe Harold " —

170 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

quarrelled with his friend regarding the manner of
preserving game, and also concerning the game-laws;
and the two retired to an adjoining room and fought
by the light of a tallow candle. Byron entered the
apartment first; and, as Chaworth was closing the
door, turning his head round, he beheld his antag-
onist's sword half drawn; and, whipping his own
weapon out, he made a quick lunge at his opponent,
and ran his sword through Byron's waistcoat; but,
as Chaworth thought, through his body. His lord-
ship closed, and, shortening his sword, stabbed Cha-
worth in the stomach, making a wound fourteen
inches deep, from which Mr. C. died the next morn-
ing. English accounts have always differed as to
which gentleman challenged the other, and also of
subsequent proceedings concerning the shocking
affair. The best authority says that Byron was
arrested and tried before his peers in Westminster
Hall, and that he read his defence, plead his peerage,
and by his privilege escaped burning in the hand.
Another account states that he was convicted of
manslaughter by a vote of one hundred and twenty-
four out of one hundred and thirty-one, and sen-
tenced to the payment of fine and one day's im-
prisonment. Public opinion frowned upon him ever
afterward, and he was pointed at as a murderer
even in his self-exile. It is an interesting fact that
the poet fell desperately in love with Mary Chaworth,
the pretty daughter of his uncle's antagonist, who led
him on to some extent, and then married another.

In 1800, Henry Grattan and Isaac Corry, members
of the Irish Parliament, indulged in vehement debate
over the question whether Ireland was to dwindle
into a province or retain her name among nations,

DUELLING IN THE DARK. l?l

during which Corry said that Grattan, instead of en-
joying the confidence of his countrymen, should be
standing at the criminal bar to answer for treason —
to which the great Irish orator replied, concluding as
follows: "The gentleman has calumniated me to-
night in Parliament; he will calumniate me to-mor-
row in the King's courts; but, had he said, or dared
to have insinuated, one half as much elsewhere, the
indignant spirit of an honest man would have an-
swered the vile and venal slanderer with a blow."
The parties left the house immediately with friends,
although it was quite dark, and repaired to the near-
est duelling ground and fought with pistols at twelve
paces, Corry having his left arm shattered at the
first shot.

As late as 1853 Captain Phillips, of the British
Army, in garrison at Bombay (India), took offence at
Lieutenant Sheppard, of the same garrison, for triv-
ial words, and the two officers indulged in volumi-
nous correspondence, which resulted in a hostile meet-
ing at night by the light of a single candle held by a
native domestic in the service of Phillips, who was
shot dead at the first fire. Sheppard was court-mar-
tialed and dismissed from the army, and afterward
tried upon the charge of murder and convicted of
manslaughter.

Captain Rutherford and Surgeon Cahill, of the
British Army — officers in the same regiment, on garri-
son duty in Scotland — in 1811, quarrelled over the
trivial matter of Cahill carrying a file of London
papers from the mess-room to his quarters, which
was, really, contrary to garrison regulations. One
word brought on another, when Rutherford, greatly
enraged, challenged the surgeon to mortal combat,

172 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

which the latter accepted, and named the same even-
ing and a neighboring quarry as the time and place
for the hostile engagement. The principals met
promptly at the quarry at the appointed hour, accom-
panied by seconds, and Rutherford received a mortal
wound. The survivor was subsequently tried and
acquitted.

In the early part of 1883 there took place a char-
acteristic encounter at Chama (New Mexico), the
result of which produced much rejoicing among that
element of border civilization which is rarely satisfied
with one " man for breakfast," thus : Charles Reiser
and Will Whitson were young men of Chama, and
bosom friends. Whitson, who was known as " Tex,"
held the office of Town Marshal ; and, seeing Keiser
carrying a pistol in violation of local ordinances,
deemed it his duty, notwithstanding their friendship,
to disarm him. Keiser resented this, and refused to
surrender his pistol ; thereupon a quarrel ensued,
and Tex proposed that they should fight a duel then
and there. It was eleven o'clock at night, but clear.
Keiser accepted the challenge, and, separating ten
paces, they began to fire at each other. In less than
a quarter of an hour both were dead. The manner
in which they received their injuries was in itself
singular. At the first fire Keiser shot Tex through
the heart. As Tex stumbled and fell he fired four
times in quick succession, and one of the balls passed
completely through Keiser's body. ''They were
both noble fellows," gently remarked a melancholy
ruffian present, as he sent a leaden messenger of
salutation through the plug hat of the newest Eng-
lish arrival at Chama. " Yes, sir ; them boys have
started many a cemetery of their own, and shan't

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 173

want for a decent funeral ; so I'll take it upon my-
self to appoint " — but the Briton with the narrow-
brimmed nail-keg hat had quietly disappeared.

Some years ago, in one of the southwestern States,
a "native and to the manner born," named Gamble,
while forming one of a group describing a semi-circle
in front of an evening fire at an only town tavern,
took occasion to vulgarly expectorate upon the well-
polished boot of a stranger, named Schuyler, who
had just arrived from New York. With the superior
blood of the old General in his veins, the insulted
man jumped up (as also did Gamble), and, in great
anger, asked the fellow if he had purposely spat upon
his boot ; to which the latter replied that Schuyler
had guessed it the first time ; and, said Gamble, " If
you don't like it I'll spit in your face." As quick as
lightning Schuyler dealt the funny man a blow, and
then the two closed, and " rough-and-tumbled " until
the landlord suggested that they go into a dark room
and fight it out with knives. " That suits me to
death!" shouted Gamble. "All right, sir," replied
Schuyler. They were then locked up in a dark room,
where they fought with knives and pistols for nearly
fifteen minutes, when all of a sudden the fighting
ceased and the apartment became quiet. The land-
lord then opened the door and found the two men
prostrate together, Schuyler underneath. Both were
covered with blood from head to foot. Gamble was
quite dead, and Schuyler was supposed to be
dying. The crowd quickly got the latter out into
the air, applied restoratives and bandages, and in a
few weeks he had fully recovered. The statement
need hardly be made that thereafter in a certain
southwestern town expectoration was discharged in

174 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

cataracts all round Schuyler's boots, but never a
sprinkle upon them. In describing this affair, some
years afterward, Schuyler says that he had been
pretty well used up by Gamble, but the latter got
down upon him to see if he was dead, when he
grabbed him and held him in that position with one
hand and with his legs, and with his other hand
drove the murderous blade clean into the fellow's
heart.

As late as October 5, 1883, two Virginians settled
an affair of honor by moonlight, according to a
dispatch from Fincastle (Va.), of the above date,
which described the circumstances of the meeting
and the meeting itself as follows : " George Thomas
and Algerman Battleheim fought a duel near here
this evening in a lonely spot known as Stony Battery.
Thomas was armed with a doubled-barreled shotgun,
loaded with heavy shot, and Battleheim with a six-
shooter Colt's revolver. Battleheim, up to two weeks
ago, had been a constant visitor at Thomas' resi-
dence, and rumors had been industriously circulated
that he was in love with his friend's wife ; and
Thomas, after carefully watching the couple for
several days, ascertained, as he thought, that Battle-
heim had perfected a plot to entice Mrs. Thomas
away. The next morning Thomas' wife was miss-
ing, and was not seen for two days. After the first
day Battleheim made his appearance, and Thomas
charged him with having enticed his wife away.
Battleheim indignantly denied the charge, and said
he meant to hold Thomas responsible for his damag-
ing accusation. They parted, and the next day the
wife returned to her husband. Battleheim, however,
demanded satisfaction of Thomas, and the latter

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 1 7$

agreed to meet him in the evening, without seconds.
Their singular choice of weapons was not in strict
accordance with the code, but it was held that, while
Thomas had only two barrels loaded with shot, they
were capable of doing more damage than six barrels
loaded with single balls, and so it proved. At the
first fire, distance thirty paces, Thomas sent the full
charge of shot into Battleheim's face ; and the latter
fell mortally wounded, after having fired wildly a
second time."

Most readers of English literature are familiar with
the story of the duel between Captain Coote and the
Earl of Warwick. Each principal had two seconds,
and the duel was fought at night in Hyde Park in
1699. All the parties were intoxicated at the time, and
the six combatants slashed at each other until Coote
was killed. Lord Mohun and the Earl of Warwick
were arrested and charged with murder, but were
acquitted.

John Wilkes, the famous English politician and
writer, fought his first duel after dark in the garden
of an inn near London, with Lord Talbot, in 1761.
It seems that Talbot, who was to be present at the
coronation of George III., as Lord Steward, had
trained his horse to step backward, so that, at the
ceremony, the animal should face, with his rider, his
Majesty as he retired from Westminster Hall. Un-
fortunately, however, this particular mode of training
had been too severe, and Talbot's horse entered the
hall tail first, despite every effort made by his morti-
fied rider to reverse his position. This was too good
a thing for the North Briton to let go unnoticed, and
Wilkes made the most of it in an amusing way,
which led to a correspondence and a duel, as stated.

176 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

After an exchange of shots the parties (and their
friends) repaired to the inn, formally made up with
each other, ordered edibles and choice wines and
made a night of it.

One of the most noted duels of this character was
that in which Richard Brinsley Sheridan (poet,
dramatist, orator and statesman), upon whom Provi-
dence had showered so many gifts, was engaged at
an early period of his eventful life. Sheridan, as is
well known to many, when about twenty years of
age, was peculiarly fond of the society of men and
women of taste and learning, and soon gave proofs
that he was inferior to none of his companions in
wit and argument. At this age he had recourse to
his literary talents for pecuniary supplies, and
directed a good deal of his attention to the drama
and its literature ; and it was during this time that
he saw and loved Miss Alicia Linley, a " lady no less
admirable for the elegant accomplishments of her sex
and the affecting simplicity of her conversation than
for the charms of her person and the fascinating
powers of her voice. She was the principal per-
former in the oratorios at Drury-Lane Theatre. The
strains which she called forth were the happiest
combinations of nature and art. Her accents were
so melodious and captivating, and their passage to
the heart so sudden and irresistible, that listening
Envy would have dropped her snakes, and stern-eyed
Fury's self have melted at the sounds. Her father,
Mr. Linley, the eminent composer, was not at first
propitious to the young man's passion, and Mr.
Sheridan had many rivals to overcome in his at-
tempts to gain the lady's affection. His persever-
ance, however, increased with the difficulties that

DUELLING IN THE DARK. 1/7

presented themselves, and his courage and resolution
were displayed in vindicating Miss Linley's reputa-
tion from a calumnious report which had been basely
thrown out against it." About this time (1772),
Captain Thomas Mathews, a gentleman well known
in the fashionable circles of Bath (England), and a
married man, pursued Miss Linley with dishonorable
purposes, to the great distress and terror of the
young lady, who acquainted Mr. Sheridan with her
troubles, and soon afterward departed for a con-
vent in France, accompanied by her honorable
friend, with whom she married, however, upon
their arrival at Calais. Captain Mathews became
actually furious at this state of affairs, and caused a
paragraph to be placed in one of the Bath papers,
derogatory to the character of the bride, and was
challenged by Charles Francis Sheridan, a brother of
Richard, who had also been greatly in love with the
sweet singer of Drury-Lane. In a few days Mr.
Sheridan returned to London with his bride, and
insisted on fighting Mathews himself. He thereupon
sent a challenge, which was accepted, and the two
rivals met, Mr. Sheridan accompanied by a Mr.
Ewart, and Mathews by Captain Knight. They
fought with swords in the parlor of a public house
in London by lights held by Charles Sheridan until
Mathews was disarmed, and (according to many
authorities, among them Mr. Sheridan), begged his
life. Mr. S. granted his request upon the condition
that he should sign a retraction of the falsehood he
had published (which Mathews did), and then started
for Bath to give the apology the same newspaper
notoriety enjoyed by the slanderous paragraph
previously published by Captain Mathews. This

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

so incensed the latter that he repaired to Bath and
challenged Sheridan, who accepted, and a second
fight took place at Kingsdown, four miles from Bath,
before daylight, Mr. Sheridan being attended by Mr.
Paumier and Captain Mathews by Mr. Barnett. This
was a most ferocious fight. The combatants first
discharged their pistols without effect, and then went
at each other with swords, which were broken at the
first lunge. They then fought with the broken parts,
until each received many wounds, Sheridan some
very dangerous ones. They at last fell to the ground
and fought until separated, Mr. Sheridan being
borne from the field with a portion of his antagonist's
weapon sticking through an ear, his breast-bone
touched, his whole body covered with wounds and
blood, and his face nearly beaten to a jelly with the
hilt of Mathews' sword. After recovering from his
injuries, Mr. Sheridan returned to London and was
re-married to his wife (in their presence and with the
consent of Mr. and Mrs. Linley), Mrs. Sheridan never
again appearing as a public performer. Mr. Sheridan
was perhaps the most matchlessly-endowed man who
ever lived. His magnificent and wonderful genius
and brilliant and commanding talent, and unrivalled
powers of oratorical excellence, were only a few of
his distinguishing traits. Yet he died partly from
the effects of enormous excesses ; and it was only by
the firmness and humanity of his physicians that
obdurate creditors were prevented from dragging
him from his house to a death-bed in jail — this in
July, 1816.

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

CHAPTER X.
NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

The Famous Judicial Combat between La Chastaignerie and Jar-
nac — Savage Encounter between Sir Edward Sackville and Lord
Bruce — The Fatal Meeting of the Duke of Hamilton and Lord
Mohun — Famous Duel between Lord Camelford and Captain
Best — An Unfortunate Affair resulting from a Mistaken Sense
of Honor — The Grey-Egerton Duel — Grey demands a Second
Shot and receives a Bullet in the Heart — Wellington and Win-
chelsea — Two Furious and Fatal French Duels — Fatal Combat
with Billiard-Balis — Punctiliousness personified — Beaumont
and Manuel — She kissed them both at the Door just as if Noth-
ing unusual had happened — What resulted from wringing a
Meddlesome Lady's Nose — " Je vous demande ma vie" — Fatal
Meetings of British Officers — An Exciting Affair at Madrid —
Description of Pierre Soule's Duel by a Participant.

IN an incidental way mention has been made of
the noted duel which took place between Guy
Chabot de Jarnac and La Chastaignerie, which was
fought on the loth of June, 1547, and was the last
judicial combat witnessed in France; for, on the day
succeeding the death of the latter, Henry II. issued
an edict prohibiting such combats; it having been
pretty well demonstrated that Providence generally
seemed to be on the side of the most skillful or mus-
cular combatant, and that the ends of justice were
often defeated by the inferior swordsmanship of par-
ties known to have been innocent of charges of

180 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

crimes preferred against them by men of doubtful
character, but who were proficient in the use of the
implements of the lists. La Chastaignerie was a
favorite of the King, and at that time the most excel-
lent and expert swordsman in France. He was the
very picture of manly beauty, being tall and well
formed, and but twenty-eight years of age. His
heart was the heart of a villian, however; and, in
order to besmirch the character of Jarnac, who had
been a great favorite with Francis I., he circulated
the detrimental report that his rival had been on
terms of criminal intimacy with his mother-in-law.
Jarnac pleaded with Francis to permit him to " pre-
serve the right" by a resort to the judicial combat,
which the King refused — in all probability out of
consideration of La Chastaignerie's proficiency with
the sword. Jarnac, however, as soon as Henry be-
came King, renewed his entreaties, which in due time
were acceded to, and a day was at last set for the
combat. The royal family, and great crowds of the
nobility, together with officers of the court and army,
were in attendance at St. Germain-en-Laye. It was
a dazzling spectacle; and the day appointed had
been made beautiful by a warm sun which had
coaxed put the buds of roses into flowers which ex-
haled sweet fragrance and filled the air with per-
fume. Jarnac was also about twenty-eight. His fea-
tures were regular and handsome, but so deadly pale
as to seem like stone. He was as calm as a Madonna,
and looked out modestly from his lustrous eyes into
the insolent face of his arrogant and unrelenting foe.
When the word was given to " Let the combatants
go!" La Chastaignerie rushed viciously toward Jar-
nac, who at first placed himself on the defensive. In

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. l8l

a few moments, however, the combatants attacked
each other savagely, and soon both had received
desperate cuts in their arms. Then they stood off
from each other for a brief space of breathing-time,
and then La Chastaignerie attempted a murderous
lunge, when Jarnac cut the ham of one of his legs,
which dazed the wretch for a moment, and sent a
thrill through the crowd. In another minute, and
while La Chastaignerie was again attempting a
second desperate lunge, Jarnac cut the ham of his
other leg, and the famous courtier fell to the ground.
It was the most sensational spectacle of the kind ever
seen in France; and a great murmur went through
the vast assemblage when the cleverest swordsman
and wrestler of the age was sent so ignominiously to
grass. " Confess yourself a liar, and restore to me
my honor, and live!" shouted Jarnac; but the fallen
courtier remained silent. Jarnac then addressed the
King: " I beseech your majesty to accept the life of
this man for God's sake and for love's. I do not
wish to have his blood on my soul. I fought for the
restoration of that honor of which he has robbed
me." The King at first declined, but at last con-
sented to accept the boon of La Chastaignerie's life.
Meanwhile the poor creature moved round on his
knees, and cut wildly and impotently at the object
before him, but in a short time fell over and bled to
death. Jarnac absolutely declined all privileges of
triumphal pageant and procession, and advised that
the body be committed to respectful interment. " I
have triumphed over my false accuser; I gained all I
fought for — the full vindication of my honor and
reputation; I am satisfied," said Jarnac to the King;
and the latter replied, "You fought like Caesar and

1 82 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

speak like Aristotle." So stung with defeat and hu-
miliation was La Chastaignerie, even when bleeding
to death, that he refused to submit to any operations
of surgery, and tore off the few bandages with which
his wounds had been bound.

A memorable meeting was that of Lord Bruce and
Sir Edward Sackville, partly on account of its san-
guinary character, and partly on account of the
prominence of the parties engaged in it. The duel
took place at Bergen-op-Zoom, in the Netherlands;
and there is to-day a spot about a mile and a half
from the Antwerp gate of Bergen which goes by the
name of Bruce-land. The duel took place in 1613,
and was a most desperate affair. Lord Clarendon,
Burke and other writers have described it as terribly
fierce, during which Bruce was mortally wounded
and Sackville desperately hurt. No writers agree as
to the cause of the duel, and Clarendon says nothing
respecting its origin. Sir Robert Preston states that
" The cause of the quarrel has remained wholly un-
detected, notwithstanding successive investigations
at different periods." The parties fought on the
Continent, so as not to incur the King's displeasure.
Lord Leicester, after much investigation, was unable
to discover the cause of the duel; but Chambers
states that Bruce, while one day paying his addresses
to Sackville's sister (Lady Clementina), was rudely
assaulted by Sackville, who came into their presence
greatly disordered by liquor or wine; and that, while
Bruce made every effort to keep the matter from the
public, Sackville acted in a contrary way, and subse-
quently gave Bruce a blow, on a crowded street, at
which a challenge was sent to the transgressor.
" We met," says Sackville, in a letter which he wrote

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 183

to a friend from Louvain, September 8, 1613, "in a
meadow, ankle-deep in water at the least; and, bid-
ding farewell to our doublets, in our shirts began to
charge each other; having afore commanded our sur-
geons to withdraw themselves a pretty distance from
us; conjuring them, besides, as they respected our
favors, or their safeties, not to stir, but suffer us to
execute our pleasure; we being fully resolved to
dispatch each other by what means we could."
Sackville's letter then presents the following descrip-
tion of the fight:

I made a thrust at my enemy, but was short ; and, in
drawing back my arm, I received a great wound thereon,
which I interpreted as a reward for my short shooting ; but
in my revenge I pressed into him, though I then missed him
also, and received a wound in my right pap, which passed
level through my body, and almost to my back. And there
we wrestled for the two greatest and dearest prizes we could
ever expect trial for — honor and life. In which struggling,
my hand, having but an ordinary glove upon it, lost one of
her servants, though the meanest. But at last breathless,
yet keeping our hold, there passed on both sides proposi-
tions of quitting each other's swords. But when amity was
dead confidence could not live, and who should quit first
was the question, which on neither part either would per-
form ; and re-striving again afresh, with a kick and a
wrench, I freed my long captive weapon, which, inconti-
nently levying at his throat, being master still of his, I de-
manded if he would ask his life, or yield his sword, both
which, though in that imminent danger, he bravely denied
to do. Myself being wounded, and feeling loss of blood,
having three conduits running on me, which began to make
me faint, and he courageously persisting not to accede to
either of my propositions, through remembrance of his for-
mer bloody desire, and feeling of my present estate, I struck
at his heart, but, with his avoiding, missed my aim, yet

184 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

passed through the body, and, drawing out my sword, re-
passed it again through another place, when he cried : " Oh !
I am slain !" seconding his speech with all the force he had
to cast me. But being too weak, after I had defended his
assault, I easily became master of him, laying him on his
back. When being upon him, I re-demanded if he would
request his life ; but it seemed he prized it not at so dear a
rate to be beholden for it, bravely replying, " He scorned
it." Which answer of his was so noble and worthy, as I
protest I could not find in my heart to offer him any more
violence, only keeping him down until at length his surgeon,
afar off, cried, " He would immediately die if his wounds
were not stopped." Whereupon I asked him if he desired
his surgeon should come, which he accepted of ; and so, be-
ing drawn away, I never 6ffered to take his sword, account-
ing it inhuman to rob a dead man, for so I held him to be.
This thus ended, I retired to my surgeon, in whose arms,
after I had remained awhile, for, want of blood I lost my
sight, and withal, as I then thought, my life also. But
strong water and his diligence quickly recovered me ; when
I escaped a great danger ; for my Lord's surgeon, when no-
body dreamt of it, came full at me with his Lord's sword,
and had not mine with my sword interposed himself, I had
been slain by those base hands; although my Lord Bruce,
weltering in his blood, and past all expectation of life, con-
formable to all his former carriage, which was undoubtedly
noble, cried out, " Rascal, hold thy hand !"

One of the most noted duels ever fought in Eng-
land was that between the Duke of Hamilton and
Lord Mohun, in Hyde Park, London, with small
swords, on the i5th of November, 1712. Mohun was
at one time as great a scamp as ever lived, and had
been concerned in several fatal encounters and was
twice tried for murder. After having been acquitted
of the assassination of Mr. Montford, an actor, " he
expressed his confusion for the many scandals he

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 185

had brought upon his degree, as a peer," says Noble,
"and promised to behave himself so for the future
as not to give further scandal; and he afterwards
applied himself to pursuits becoming his station, and
in the House of Peers often distinguished himself by
judicious speeches. He afterward accompanied the
Earl of Macclesfield to Hanover, and lived with
great sobriety." Shortly after this, Macclesfield died
and left Mohun a large estate. Later, Macclesfield 's
bachelor brother dying, a dispute arose about the
property between the Duke of Hamilton (who had
married Elizabeth, sole heir of said property) and
Lord Mohun (who also had claims upon the estate),
and during their presence at an examination before
a Master of Chancery, Hamilton reflected upon Mr
Whitworth, who had been steward in the Macclesfield
family, and said that "he had neither truth nor
justice in him;" to which Mohun replied that " he
had as much as his grace." On the following day
Lieutenant-General Maccartney conveyed a chal-
lenge from the Duke to Mohun, and on the next
morning (Sunday) the two gentlemen met, and each
killed the other, after a prolonged and savage fight
Colonel Hamilton, the Duke's second (and cousin),
who was severely wounded by Mohun's second, made
oath, according to some accounts, that the Duke of
Hamilton received his mortal wound from General
Maccartney; which was partly corroborated by one
of the surgeons, who declared that Hamilton could
not have received his death-thrust from Mohun.
Maccartney at once quit the country, but afterward
returned, and was tried for murder and acquitted,
and was discharged of the manslaughter by burning
with a cold iron to prevent an appeal of murder.

1 86 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Of modern English duels, none, perhaps, was more
causeless, or more replete in distressing detail and
circumstance, than the fatal encounter between
Captain Best, of the British army, and Lord Thomas
Camelford. The duel took place near Holland
House, London, March 10, 1804. Camelford and
Best had always been close friends, and both were
very fond of women and wine and cards. Early in
the month above named they had spent a few hours
one evening at Hammond's, a noted gaming-place,
when Camelford retired and left his companion at
play with one Symons, who had already commenced
to fleece Best through the medium of marked cards.
The Captain shortly afterward caught the sharper
just as he was about to introduce some extra cards
from within a sleeve of his coat; and, jumping up,
seized Symons by the throat, and hurled him vio-
lently to the floor, and then kicked his face into a
jelly, and otherwise so bruised the cheat that his wife
hardly recognized him when they met. Mrs. Symons
became pallid with anger and disappointment, and
promised her husband that he should be avenged.
"Leave the fellow to me!" the mad woman ex-
claimed, " and I will see to it that he gets his
deserts." So she sat down, quietly, with hell's own
fury delineated in her face, and wrote to Camelford,
as follows: "I beg you to be strictly on your guard
in your future dealings and associations with Captain
Best, who speaks of your lordship in disrespectful
and disdainful terms, especially when he is beside
himself with wine." " There," she murmured, after
folding and addressing the note, " is your death-war-
rant, my noble Captain; and I smile while contem-
plating the consequences." In due time the letter

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 1 8?

reached Camelford; and, upon his next meeting with
Best, he declined to accept his friend's hand, and
said: " Pardon me, Captain, if I inform you that our
acquaintance must terminate. It has lasted too long,
already." ''Your lordship has the most perfect
liberty to do as he deems best; but, pardon me, my
lord, if I ask you to assign a reason for such action ?"
interrogated the other, calmly. " Speaking of me
disrespectfully and disdainfully behind my back
seem to me to be reasons abundant." " And, pray,
sir, who is your informant ?" " I do not care to
make that known." " O, of course not." "Sir, what
do you mean ?" " I mean, sir, that your conduct is
ungentlemanly and dishonorable — do you under-
stand that, my lord?" "I understand you to be a
liar and a scoundrel, Captain Best, and I want
nothing more whatever to do with you." "That is
perfectly satisfactory, sir, except that I shall hold
you responsible for your language. Some one has
been slandering me and making a fool of you."
But Camelford had strode away. In the meantime
Best made some effort to solve the cause of his
friend's misconduct, never for a moment dreaming
of Symons or his vindictive wife. It was soon set-
tled that they should fight with pistols, as both were
excellent shots. When they appeared upon the field,
each accompanied by two seconds, Best said: "It is
scarcely probable, my lord, that both of us can
leave here alive. You have undoubtedly been im-
posed upon; and for that reason I am even now
willing to receive an explanation of your action, not-
withstanding the gravity of the insult. We have
long been good friends, and I am anxious to make a
last effort towards reconciliation." " I decline to

1 88 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

retract a word; it is too late. We came here for
another purpose, and I am ready," replied Camelford.
They then took their positions at fifteen paces; and,
at the drop of a white handkerchief held by one of
the seconds (who had taken up his position midway
between them, but out of range), and the words
" One — two — three — fire !" both gentlemen discharged
their weapons simultaneously; Camelford drop-
ping to the earth mortally wounded and Best
escaping unhurt. The dying man then raised him-
self upon his right hand, and motioned for his adver-
sary to approach, when he whispered: "You have
killed me, Best; but the fault is wholly mine, and I
relieve you of all blame. Shake hands with me, and
forgive me, and then fly and save yourself from
arrest." Best and his seconds then mounted their
horses and rode to Hounslow; and Camelford's
seconds, becoming demoralized, also fled, leaving
their principal to die alone on the field.

A mistaken sense of honor prevented Lord Camel-
ford from accepting terms of reconciliation; for,
as the reader is aware, the slightest explanation
would have been the means of an adjustment that
would have been strictly honorable to both parties.
These reflections may serve to introduce another
affair which ought never to have taken place — the
duel between Captain Stackpole, of the British frig-
ate Statira, and Lieutenant Cecil, of the Argo. A
naval officer once inquired of Lieutenant Cecil if he
knew Captain Stackpole; to which he replied that he
did, and that he had the highest opinion of him as an
intrepid officer and skilful seaman; adding, however,
that he believed him capable of occasionally drawing
a long bow. This remark at last reached the ears of

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 189

Stackpole, who, after satisfying himself that Cecil
had made use of such words, declared that he would
hold the lieutenant to an account for them when and
wherever he met him. It was so far fortunate that
they did not meet for four years; but the opportu-
nity at last arrived, when the Statira was lying in the
harbor of Port Royal (Jamaica), and the Argo, of
which Lieutenant Cecil was senior officer, happened
to enter that port. Immediately on Captain Stack-
pole being made aware of the circumstance he sent
Lieutenant White on board the Argo, with a message
to Cecil demanding an immediate meeting or a
suitable apology for the slanderous words he had
used. Lieutenant Cecil did not remember just
exactly what he had said; but, as they had been
quoted by a brother officer, he could not, as a man of
honor, act otherwise than avow them; and, as to an
apology, he wished Captain Stackpole to understand
that, under all the circumstances, while he should
have no objection in apologizing to any other officer
in his majesty's navy, he could not do so to the Cap-
tain of the Statira, who was known throughout the
service as an excellent shot. In consequence of this
reply the parties met at a place called Park Hender-
son on the following morning, April 28, 1814, and
took their ground at ten paces. They both fired at
the same time, and Stackpole was instantly killed,
never even uttering a groan.

The duel between Colonel Grey and Major
Egerton, of the British army, was fought at Putney
Heath, in the year 1761. Egerton, while returning
from the theatre one evening with a lady, was run
into carelessly by Grey, who was somewhat under
the influence of liquor. Egerton, in his excitement

I9O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

applied the term " stupid booby" to Grey, who at-
tempted to draw his sword. Seeing this, Egerton,
instead of hurrying away with his lady, imprudently
knocked the tipsy officer down, and received a chal-
lenge the following morning, which he promptly
accepted. The next afternoon they met, each with
two seconds, who quietly measured off the distance,
which was ten paces. The principals then confronted
each other with pistols, and both fired simultaneously
without effect. The seconds then attempted to end
the meeting, but Grey demanded another shot.
Captain Clifford, one of the seconds of the latter,
again gave the signal, and Grey fell dead and
Egerton received a wound in the side.

In 1829, in England, the Earl of Winchelsea was
challenged by the Duke of Wellington, and the dis-
tinguished gentlemen met with pistols. The Duke
fired first without injuring the Earl, who discharged
his weapon in the air, and subsequently acknowl-
edged, through his second, that he had made expres-
sions against the Duke which were not warranted by
facts, which he greatly regretted, and for which he
would amply apologize.

A violent polemic had lasted for a long time be-
tween two Bonapartist journals of Paris (le Petit Cap-
oral and le Combat], which resulted in a duel between
the two editors-in-chief (Diehard, of the Petit Caporal,
and De Massas, of the Combat). The police, however,
interfered with the first meeting, and the fight was
therefore further continued in the columns of the two
papers; until, finally, it was agreed that Paul de Cas-
sagnac and Cuneo d'Ornano should be called as arbi-
ters. These gentlemen declared that a duel was
necessary, and so Diehard and Massas met again

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. \§\

September 3, 1882, in a private park at Nogent on the
Marne. Monsieur de Massas at once attacked his ad-
versary with vigor, and wounded him three times (in
his head, on the shoulder, and in the hand), where-
upon Diehard rushed desperately upon and stabbed
Massas through his lungs, who staggered and fell on
his back. Friends immediately hastened to the side
of the wounded man; and the doctor, upon examin-
ing the wound, perceived that no blood was flowing
— " the surest sign of death," he said. The internal
hemorrhage was not long in doing its worst; for, in a
few moments, without saying another word, De Mas-
sas made the sign of the cross and expired. The re-
mains were taken to his residence at Colombes, near
Paris, where his mourning widow and her four chil-
dren are living at present. Dichard's wounds did not
prove to be serious or severe. De Massas was but
thirty- three years of age. He had been an officer in
the Third Infantry regiment of the Marine, and had
distinguished himself during the war of 1870.

In an avenue of the forest of Planoise, at a short
distance from Autun, two men met on the i8th of
May, 1883, with swords in their hands, and exchanged
a few strokes. Suddenly the seconds heard a cry and
saw one of the combatants fall to the ground. They
hastened to his support; but, in four hours afterward,
the wounded man was dead. In explanation, it may
be stated that M. Asselin, of the Department of the
Saone and Loire, was the possessor of a very rich es-
tate; and, having been invested with the title of Lieu-
tenant of Game-Hunting, he assumed the privilege of
operating over a vast domain for the purpose of rid-
ding the neigboring country of various kinds of de-
structive game. Monsieur de Saint Victor — fifty

I Q2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

years old and without a fortune — had been an officer
of the Cuirassiers. After quitting service he had ac-
cepted an offer of his cousins (the Talleyrand-Peri-
gords) to act as superintendent of their large estates
in the Department of the Saone and Loire. Saint
Victor did not approve at all of the frequent presence
on the latter-named estates of Monsieur Asselin; and,
therefore, directed his employees to quietly and care-
fully watch the movements of this gentleman when
on hunting expeditions which took him over the
Talleyrand property. It was not long before Asselin
had organized a boar-hunting expedition, at which
one of Saint Victor's vigilant guards presented a com-
plaint to the effect that Asselin had exceeded his
powers by not announcing his visit previously, as re-
quired by the law. And Monsieur de Saint Victor,
while he did not intend to proceed legally, transmit-
ted a letter to Monsieur Asselin, in which he ap-
proved of the action of his subaltern. A lively dis-
cussion followed, of course; and, after an exchange of
several letters between the two gentlemen, Asselin
despatched two of his friends to De Saint Victor with
authority to effect terms of permanent settlement.
The latter, on his part, selected two friends, and a
duel was quickly agreed upon; and De Saint Victor
(who had been an officer of cavalry) chose the saber
as a weapon, expressing the hope "that the duel
would have a good ending." " Is it a duel for life and
death that he wants ?" interrogated Asselin, who
was an expert only with pistols and the sword, but
not with the saber. " Oui, Monsieur." At which
Asselin rushed furiously upon De Saint Victor and
gave him a stab of such force that his weapon went
clean through the intestines and out by the spinal

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 193

cord, causing almost instant death. " I am dying,"
murmured De Saint Victor; "call my wife and a
priest." He was then taken to a house at Fragny,
and Madame de Saint Victor was sent for, and arrived
just in time to receive the last breath of her husband.
The survivor only received a slight cut or two on the
hand and cheek.

On the 4th of September, 1843, in the commune of
Maisonfort, France, two young men named Lenfant
and Melfant, quarrelled while playing at billiards,
and agreed, at last, to settle their disturbance by a
duel with billiard balls; after which they drew lots to
see which one should get the red ball and throw first.
Melfant won the red ball and the first throw, and the
two at once took their positions in a garden at a
measured distance of twelve paces from each other.
Melfant, when the signal was given to throw, made
several motions, saying to his adversary, " I am
going to kill you at the first throw." And then he
hurled the ivory sphere with deadly aim and effect,
for it struck Lenfant in the middle of the forehead,
and he dropped dead without uttering a word. The
survivor was arrested and tried for wilful murder, and
convicted of manslaughter.

Lord Shelburne (with Lord Frederick Cavendish
as his second) and Colonel Fullerton (accompanied
by Lord Balcarras) met in Hyde Park, March 22,
1780, and fought with pistols at twelve paces. After
the parties had taken their ground Colonel Fullerton
desired Lord Shelburne to fire first, which he declined
to do. The seconds then commanded Fullerton to
fire, which he did, and missed. Then Shelburne fired
and missed. Fullerton then fired a second shot and
hit his antagonist in the right groin. Mr. Shelburne,

194 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

however, declined to give up his pistol to his second,
saying, "I have not yet fired a second time." Mr.
Fullerton, at this, returned to his place, which he had
left with a view of assisting his lordship, and com-
manded Mr. Shelburne to fire. The latter cried out,
" No, sir; I hope you don't think I would fire again at
you;" and his lordship then discharged his weapon in
the air. The seconds then asked Shelburne if he had
any difficulty in declaring he meant nothing personal
to the Colonel, and he replied, " This is no time for ex-
planation, as the affair has taken another course. Al-
though I am wounded, I am able to go on if Colonel
Fullerton feels any resentment." The latter declared
that he was incapable of harboring any such senti-
ment. "Besides," added Fullerton, " as your lord-
ship is wounded, and you have fired in the air, it is
impossible for me to go on." Both were members of
Parliament at the time, and Fullerton had been com-
missioned a Lieutenant-Colonel in the army and had
been a member of the English Embassy at the Court
of France. The cause of the duel was an attack upon
Fullerton by Shelburne, who intimated that the Colo-
nel and his regiment were as ready to act against the
liberties of England as against her enemies.

A duel of much the same character took place in
Hyde Park between William Adam and Charles
James Fox, Members of Parliament, in 1789. Gen-
eral Fitzpatrick acted as second for Mr. Fox, and
Major Humbertson for Mr. Adam. The latter fired
first and wounded Fox, who fired without effect.
The seconds then interfered and asked Mr. Adam if
he was satisfied, who replied, "Will Mr. Fox declare
he meant no personal attack upon my character?"
Upon which the latter said, "This is no place for

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 19$

apologies — go on." Mr. Adam then fired his second
pistol without effect, and Mr. Fox discharged his re-
maining weapon in the air, and declared that, as the
affair was ended, he had no difficulty in stating that
he meant no more personal affront to Mr. Adam than
he did to either of the other gentlemen present. Mr.
Adam then advanced and replied, " Sir, you have
behaved like a man of honor." Mr. Fox then said
that he believed himself wounded, which was a fact.
It is a curious circumstance that Adam wounded his
antagonist with the same pistol with which Fullerton
used in his duel with Shelburne a few months before,
and that both gentlemen were hit in the groin. Mr.
Fox, in speaking of the duel afterward, maintained
the same opinion he had expressed in interrupting
Colonel Fullerton in his invective against Lord Shel-
burne— that "if it were once admitted as a principle
that a personal affront was offered to gentlemen
whenever their names and conduct were mentioned,
the most essential of all the rights of Parliament
would be lost, and there would be an end to all free-
dom of debate."

Manuel and Beaumont were wealthy bankers and
stockbrokers of Paris. Mrs. Manuel, who was young
and beautiful, had fallen in love with Beaumont.
Of this fact Manuel was first notified by one of
those cunning devils — an anonymous correspondent.
Thereupon he watched the erring couple, and soon
learned the worst. He immediately quarrelled with
and challenged Beaumont, and they soon afterward
met with pistols, and Manuel was shot dead. This
affair took place in the Bois de Boulogne in 1821.
Previous to the fatal meeting, Manuel, who was an
excellent man, besought his erring wife to abandon

IQ THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Beaumont. " For the sake of our six children," en-
treated the frantic husband, " give up this base man.
If you are lost to all honor, yourself, spare our dear
little ones the further taints of your dishonor and
disgrace." But the guilty creature turned a deaf ear
to these, the last words of her husband. In a short
time after the killing of Manuel, Beaumont aban-
doned Mrs. M., of course. Both gentlemen were
possessors of great wealth.

An exciting duel took place during the reign of
Henry the Third of France between two officers
named Deveze and Soeilles. The latter had been
discovered to be on too intimate terms with the wife of
Deveze, who challenged his brother-officer and shot
him in the shoulder. After his recovery Soeilles
challenged Deveze, who accepted, fired first, and then
turned and. showed his heels. Soeilles afterward be-
trayed Deveze's sister, and was waylaid and killed by
Deveze as soon as he was made aware of the fact ;
while the latter was in turn murdered by a cousin of
Soeilles named D'Aubinac.

La Fontaine, who had a very pretty wife, became
jealous of a young officer, whose really honorable in-
tentions were too marked to please a certain gentle-
man of the lago stamp — and who, in reality, was at
the bottom of the whole affair, and who was quite
willing to see either the old philosopher or the young
ensign or both put out of the way — and a duel was
the consequence. La Fontaine was disarmed, artisti-
cally, when he invited his antagonist home, where the
madame met them at the door, and kissed them, as
was her custom often before they fought.

On March 19, 1778, the Count d'Artois (the
youngest brother of the French King) and the Duke

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 1 97

of Bourbon (a son of the Prince of Cond6) fought
with swords, near Paris ; and, after a furious en-
counter, d'Artois was wounded in the arm. This
duel grew out of an affair at a masquerade, at which
the Duchess of Bourbon lifted the mask of the Count
— who was incognito with a dismissed lady of honor
(Madame de Cavillac) — and had her nose vigorously
wrung for her pains, to the great confusion of all
present. The young Count was afterwards exiled by
the King, notwithstanding the injuries he had re-
ceived in his duel with the husband of the meddle-
some Madame la Duchesse de Bourbonne — who was,
in fact, greatly infatuated with the young Count, and
was naturally enough turbulent with jealousy and
rage at the presence together of d'Artois and the be-
witching De Cavillac.

On the iyth of November, 1778, at Bath (England),
Count Rice and Viscount du Barry quarrelled at the
home of the latter, and agreed to settle their disturb-
ance just outside of the city the next morning at day-
light. Early the following day the principals met
according to agreement, accompanied by seconds and
a surgeon, provided with pistols and swords. As
soon as they arrived, the ground was marked out by
the seconds, and the principals took their places.
Viscount du Barry fired first and lodged his bullet in
Rice's thigh, the ball from the Count's weapon tak-
ing effect in Du Barry's breast ; at the second shot
they both fired together, but their pistols "flashed in
the pan." They then threw away their pistols and
advanced toward each other with their drawn swords,
when, all of a sudden, Du Barry fell, saying: " Je
vous demand ma vie" (I ask you for my life) ; to which
Rice replied ; " Je vous la donne" (I give it to you)-,

198 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and in a few seconds Du Barry expired. Rice was at
once conveyed to his own home, where he lay in great
agony for a long time, but finally recovered. The
coroner's jury rendered a verdict of manslaughter,
but at the trial Rice was acquitted.

On July i, 1843, Lieutenant-Colonel David Lynar
Fawcett, of the Fifty-fifth Regiment (British) Foot,
was killed by Lieutenant Alexander Thompson of the
Royal Horse-Guards. The two officers had married
sisters, and the settlement of some property which
had fallen to the ladies had been left to Thompson,
whose manner of proceeding had not been satis-
factory to Fawcett. The latter not only gave the
lieutenant a vigorous piece of his mind concerning
the matter in trust, but ordered him out of his (Faw-
cett's) house — this, on the 3oth of June, 1843. "You
shall hear from me, sir, for this, immediately," ex-
claimed Thompson, as he departed. " And you will
not have to wait long for a reply, rest assured," re-
joined Fawcett. They fought with pistols at Camden
Town the following morning, and Fawcett received a
mortal wound in the side at the first fire, and died in
three days. On the 4th of May, 1790, Mr. Power, son
of Richard Power, fought with Captain Grumbleton,
of the Thirteenth Dragoons, in the county of Water-
ford (Ireland). The weapons were pistols, at twelve
paces, and Mr. Power fell mortally wounded at the
first fire, and died while being taken home.

On the 4th of September, 1783, Colonel Cosmo
Gordon and Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas met at
Hyde Park and fought with pistols. The terms
were that they should, after receiving their weapons,
advance and fire when they pleased. When within
about eight yards the Colonel fired without effect,

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 1 99

but was wounded by his antagonist in the thigh.
They fired the second time without effect ; but at the
third fire Thomas fell mortally wounded, and died
while being taken from the field. On the seven-
teenth of the following month of the same year,
Captain Munro, of the Sixteenth Regiment of Dra-
goons, and Mr. Green met with their seconds near
Battersea bridge and fired at each other three times,
when Green was wounded in the side. The seconds
then asked Mr. Green if he was satisfied, and he
replied that he was not unless Mr. Munro was willing
to make a public apology ; which the latter declined
to do. "Then one of us must die," exclaimed Green;
and they again fired, Mr. Munro receiving a bullet in
the knee and Mr. Green one in the heart.

An exciting event transpired at Madrid in 1855;
many accounts of which (some of them very contra-
dictory) were published at the time in English,
French, and American newspapers. It seems that at
a soiree given at Madrid by Marquis de Turgot (the
French ambassador), at which were present Pierre
Soule (Minister from the United States to Spain) and
his wife, the latter was likened to Margaret of Bur-
gundy, in the hearing of her son, Neville Soule, by
the Duke d'Alba. The next day the latter was chal-
lenged by young Soule, and upon the following morn-
ing the parties met and fought with swords for more
than half an hour, when the Duke was wounded in
the neck; after which their seconds (Colonel Milans
del Bosch and Secretary Perry for Mr. Soule, and the
Count of Punonrostro and General de la Concha for
the Duke) brought about a termination. That same
day it became very generally reported thoughout
genteel society in Madrid that the French ambassa-

200 THE FIELD OF

dor himself had first made use of the insulting ex-
pression; and he was promptly challenged by the
American Minister, which challenge was accepted by
the Marquis, who designated pistols as weapons. Mr.
Soule was attended by M. Picon and General Valdes,
and de Turgot by Lord Howden and General Caillier.
They fought at ten paces and fired once without ef-
fect. At the second fire the French ambassador was
severely wounded in the left leg near the knee, and
fell to the ground. While being taken to his carnage
the Marquis stated that he had never used the ex-
pression, or any insulting remarks whatever, regard-
ing Mrs. Soule, as reported. The New York Home
Journal of January 18, 1884, contained a description
of the foregoing duel contributed by Mr. A. L.
Taveau, an eye-witness, as follows:

Upon arriving at Madrid, in the month of December, 1854,
I repaired to the elegant palace of the American Embassy
with letters of introduction. But I had scarcely seen the
major-domo disappear up the massive marble stairway with
my missive^ when, in a few moments, one of the most remark-
able men I ever saw came descending to meet me. With
both hands extended for a cordial shake of the hand, and re-
turning me, at the same time, my document, he exclaimed,
" Take this back, my friend, you come from a State of gen-
tlemen— a gentleman from South Carolina needs no letters
of introduction to Pierre Soule ;" and shaking my hand very
cordially with both of his, led me into his private cabinet.
His tout ensemble was so striking that the whole man was
instantly photographed on my mind ; and I do not know
how better to draw his portrait than to say that I could al-
most imagine myself standing in the presence of Napoleon
Bonaparte. Nor was it a personal resemblance alone ; but
his whole manner, together with his rapid and eloquent
speech, recalled to mind all that his biographers tell us of

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 2OI

the emperor. The next day found me installed in his cabi-
net as private secretary : " I want you," said he, " to receive
my letters, read them over, and give me the important
points of each ; and I will instruct you what to reply." Such
a position was a very important advantage to me, as it im-
mediately introduced me to court, and gave me the entree
to all the best salons. It was thus that I was enabled to
hear everybody talk about the famous duels, and ascertain
the facts connected with them. It was during Mr. Pierce's
administration that the subject of the annexation of Cuba
to the United States was the all-engrossing topic of the day ;
and Mr. Soule, who had warmly supported the idea in Con-
gress, was appointed by Mr. Pierce as Minister to Spain.
This appointment was so distasteful to France that Mr.
Soule, on entering that kingdom, en route to Spain, was sub-
jected to much annoyance, and slighted by the government
of Napoleon III. It was not long after the minister's arri-
val in Madrid that it was made known to him, in various
ways, by the minions of Louis Napoleon, that his presence,
as ambassador, was distasteful. This culminated in an af-
front offered to Madame Soule by the French Minister,
Monsieur de Turgot, at a ball given at his own palace, to
which, of course, the American Minister and family were in-
vited. When the Soules arrived, the marquis, with the
Duke of Alva and others, were standing at the entrance-door
of the ball-room. The Soules paid their compliments of
salutation to the host, and passed on. One gentleman re-
marked both upon the beauty of Madame Soule and her rich
attire. " Dou you think so ?" replied the marquis, " well,
I do not share in your admiration of this woman, for she
strongly reminds me of Margaret of Burgundy." So shocked
were the Soules' friends at such an insulting remark by the
host himself, of so estimable a lady, that Mr. Soule was
promptly informed of it. - Walking deliberately toward the
marquis, he hunched him in the side with his elbow, and,
giving him a significant look from his splendid, but now
fiery eyes, quietly remarked : " I have heard, sir, of your inde-
cent remark ; you shall also hear from me to-morrow ;" and,

2O2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

rejoining his family, the Soules immediately retired. In the
meantime it began to be whispered about that the remark
had originated with the Duke of Alva. He, being a younger
man, Mr. Soule's son, Nelville Soule, promptly sent him a
challenge next day. This the duke at first declined, on the
plea that he was not the author of the insulting remarks.
But a telegram soon came from France announcing to him
that, unless he accepted the challenge, he was no more to
call himself the brother-in-law of the emperor — the Duchesse
of Alva and Eugenie, the empress, being sisters. This set-
tled the matter at once. The challenge was accepted, and
the duke being the challenged party, exercised the privilege
of the choice of weapons. Being one of the best swordsmen
in Spain, he chose broadswords as the weapons for the com-
bat. This was awkward for young Soule, who had never
handled a sword in his life. Nevertheless, the choice was
accepted and an instructor procured. Only one lesson, how-
ever, was the professor allowed to give, for he was a French-
man, and was -promptly warned of his likelihood of being
sent to Caen, if he persisted. With one lesson did the
young champion of America enter the lists, and so lustily did
his sinewy arm sway the falchion, that the duke shortly be-
came demoralized, and, after receiving a wound in the neck,
from which sangre azul (blue blood) poured very freely, the
fight was arrested by their mutual seconds, and satisfaction
declared given and received. This being ended, Mr. Soule
then challenged the French Minister, M. de Turgot, to com-
bat also. The challenge was promptly accepted, and pistols
chosen. The hostile parties met outside the city, in an open
field, bounded on one side by a high wall, adown which, was
afterward remarked, descended a line, in front of which Mr.
Soule was unwittingly posted. Upon shots being exchanged,
the marquis fell prostrate to the ground — Mr. Soule unhurt
remained immovable as a " Stonewall " — and it was found
that Mr. Soule's ball had inflicted a very painful, if not dan-
gerous wound in the marquis' hip. The fight was declared
ended, and once more the "star spangled banner waved over
the free and the brave," at the American embassy, where it

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 2O$

Continued to float, unmolested or insulted again by any
power until Mr. Soule's return to America. So far from
these duels causing the Soule's to become unpopular with
the Madrilenos, they became the cynosure of all eyes, and
received the most marked attention from the whole royal
family. The writer of this, having remained in Madrid the
whole winter, was thus enabled, personally, to see not only
what popularity the Soules had gained by their courage, but,
also, that los Etados Unidos (the United States) were more
respected than ever.

204 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XL

EUROPEAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

The Fatal Meeting between Colonel Montgomery and Captain
Macnamara — Two Sanguinary Affairs — Lord Macartney's Two
Duels — A Number of Memorable Combats — The Foolish Apoth-
ecary— How Aldworth Obtained Satisfaction — A Number of
Fatal Duels — Fatal Quarrel between English Officers concern-
ing Americans — Alphonse de Lamartine's Duel — M. Pierre
Bonaparte's Affairs of Honor — Other Quarrels among Distin-
guished Persons — The Fatal Duel between Signers Levito and
Nicotera, the Picturesque Italian Conspirator, at Rome —
Aurelian Scholl, the Witty Chroniqueur, and Count Albert de
Dion settle their Long-standing Difficulty with Swords at the
Race-course of Longchamps — Signer Rossi's Duel at Casala
and its Consequences.

THE fatal duel between Colonel Montgomery, of
the British army, and Captain Macnamara, of the
British navy, in 1803, may be presented as one of the
most melancholy events in all the annals of duelling.
Both officers had distinguished themselves in hard-
fought battles, and both were under thirty years of
age. They were one day riding in Hyde Park,
accompanied by their dogs. The latter quarrelled,
during which the two officers got into an angry alter-
cation, which ended by Montgomery presenting Mac-
namara his card of address. In three hours afterward
the two gentlemen met at Primrose Hill — Mont-
gomery being attended by Sir William Kier, and
Macnamara by Captain Barry. They fought with

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 2O5

pistols, at twelve paces, and at the first fire Mont-
gomery received Macnamara's bullet in the heart,
and the latter received his antagonist's missile in the
hip. Colonel Montgomery was taken from the field
dead, and Captain Macnamara was shortly afterward
tried at the Old Bailey on a charge of murder, and
acquitted. During the trial the survivor read a
paper in his defence, which concluded as follows :

The origin of the difference, as you see it in the evidence,
was insignificant. The heat of two persons, each defending
an animal under his protection, was natural, and could not
have led to any serious consequences. It was not the de-
ceased's defending his own dog, nor his threatening to
destroy mine, that led me to the fatal catastrophe ; it was
the defiance which most unhappily accompanied what was
said. Words receive their interpretation from the avowed
intention of the speaker. The offence was forced upon me
by the declaration that he invited me to be offended, and
challenged me to vindicate the offence by calling upon him
for satisfaction. " If you are offended with what has passed,
you know where to find me." These words, unfortunately
repeated and reiterated, have over and over, and over again,
been considered by criminal courts of justice as sufficient to
support an indictment for a challenge. The judgments of
courts are founded upon the universal understandings and
feelings of mankind, and common candor must admit that
an officer, however desirous to avoid a quarrel, cannot refuse
to understand what even the grave judges of the law must
interpret as a provocation and a defiance. I declare, there-
fore, most solemnly against the deceased ; nothing, indeed,
but insanity could have led me to expose my own life to
such immense peril, under the impulse of passion from so
inadequate a cause as the evidence before you exhibits, when
separated from the defiance which was the fatal source of
mischief, and I could well have overlooked that too if the
world, in its present state, could have overlooked it also. I

206 THE FIELD OF

went into the field, therefore, with no determination or
desire to take the life of my opponent, or to expose my own.
I went there in hopes of receiving some soothing satisfac-
tion for what would otherwise have exposed me in the gen-
eral feelings and opinions of the world. The deceased was
a man of popular manners, as I have heard, and with a very
general acquaintance. I, on the other hand, was in a man-
ner a stranger in this great town, having been devoted from
my infancy to the duties of my profession in distant seas.
If, under these circumstances, the words which the deceased
intended to be offensive, and which he repeatedly invited to
be resented, had been passed by, and submitted to, they
would have passed from mouth to mouth, have been ever
exaggerated at every repetition, and my honor must have
been lost. Gentlemen, I am a captain in the British navy.
My character you can only hear from others ; but to main-
tain my character and station, I must be respected. When
called upon to lead others into honorable danger, I must
not be supposed to be a man who had sought safety by sub-
mitting to what custom has taught others to consider as a
disgrace. I am not presuming to urge anything against the
laws of God or of this land. I know that, in the eye of
religion and reason, obedience to the law, though against
the general feelings of the world, is the first duty, and ought
to be the rule of action. But in putting a construction upon
my motives, so as to ascertain the quality of my actions,
you will make allowances for my situation. It is impossible
to define in terms the proper feelings of a gentleman ; but
their existence have supported this happy country many
ages, and she might perish if they were lost. Gentlemen, I
will detain you no longer; I will bring before you many
honorable persons who will speak what they know of me in
my profession, and in private life, which will the better
enable you to judge whether what I have offered in my
defence may safely be received by you as truth. Gentlemen,
I submit myself entirely to your judgment. I hope to
obtain my liberty through your verdict; and to employ it
with honor in the defence of the liberties of my country.

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 2O?

In 1721, in Lincoln's Inn Fields (England), Mr.
Fulford and Captain Cusack met with swords, at-
tended by two seconds on each side. A description
of this duel, in an old English magazine, concludes
as follows: " It had lasted but a few minutes, when
Fulford had the imprudence to raise his arm and
expose his chest ; the Captain's sword glided swiftly
below it, and pierced him to the heart. Fulford fell
back and died without a groan." The same maga-
zine presents a graphic description of the duel (in
1589) between Henry of Essex (who bore the royal
standard of Henry II. when that monarch invaded
Wales) and Robert de Montford — who commenced
their fight on horseback, and followed it up on foot —
which concludes: "The encounter was desperate;
and, so equal were the parties to the struggle, that
it was uncertain to give the chance to either. At
last, with a more than human strength, and with a
false parry on the side of Essex, de Montford hurled
his adversary to the ground, and with a quick and
sudden motion, drove his sword into the neck of
Essex."

Lord Macartney and Mr. Sadlier had an altercation
at the Council Board at Bombay on March 16, 1784,
and afterwards fought with pistols, Macartney receiv-
ing a dangerous wound, from which he recovered,
however. On the 8th of June, 1786, Macartney met
General Stuart near Kensington, and fought with
pistols at twelve short paces. When they were about
to fire Stuart told Macartney that his pistol was not
cocked, at which his lordship thanked the General,
and cocked. Macartney was wounded at the first
fire, and the seconds at once declared that the matter
must rest. But Stuart exclaimed : " This is no sat-

208 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

isfaction;" and asked Macartney if he was not able
to fire again. His lordship replied: " With pleasure;"
and urged Colonel Fullerton (his second) to permit
him to proceed. Colonel Gordon (Stuart's second)
informed the General that his antagonist was
wounded and could not proceed ; who replied :
"Then I must defer it till another occasion." To
which Macartney added: "If that is the case we had
better proceed again, now." But the seconds put an
end to all further conversation between the parties,
and his lordship was removed from the field in an
easy carriage to his home.

In 1794, in England, Lord Tankerville and Edward
Bouverie, Member of Parliament, met with pistols,
and the latter was killed. In 1740, in England, Gen-
eral Braddock (who afterward died in America) and
Colonel Gumley, officers of the British army, fought
with swords, and Braddock was disarmed, but unin-
jured, although he refused to beg for his life. In
1699, in England, Colonel Oliver le Neve and Sir
Henry Buckinghamshire, Member of Parliament, met
with swords, and the latter was mortally wounded.
In 1809, in England, Lord Castlereagh and George
Canning (then Foreign Secretary) met with pistols
on Putney Heath, and at the second shot Canning
received a thigh wound, after which the seconds of
the two statesmen put a stop to the combat. In 1841,
in England, Captain Harvey G. Tuckett and James
Thomas Cardigan met with pistols on Wimbledon
Common, and the former was severely wounded at
the second shot.

On May i, 1760, at Manchester (England), while
Major Glover, of the Lincolnshire militia, was pass-
ing pompously along, a Mr. Jackson (an apothecary)

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 209

dashed out of his store and tapped the militiaman
playfully on his back. Subsequently the two met,
and Glover touched the frolicsome compounder of
nauseating preparations perceptibly with a switch;
at which the apothecary flew into a rage, and chal-
lenged the militiaman to meet him at once in mortal
combat. The latter was greatly surprised, apolo-
gized for what might have seemed insulting, and
declared that what he had done was only meant as a
joke. But the apothecary would listen to nothing
short of a hostile meeting; so the two at last went
into a neighboring coffee-house, and in a very few
moments Jackson received satisfaction by being run
through with Glover's sword ; and just before he
died, the foolish apothecary declared that everything
connected with his death was his own fault.

In 1714, in England, Colonel Chudworth, of the
British army, insulted William Aldworth, Member of
Parliament, by calling him a Jacobite. The latter
challenged Chudworth, and a meeting was arranged
to take place at Marylebone Fields, at which Aid-
worth was killed; weapons, swords. In August, 1790,
M. de Cazales and M. Barnave, two French lawyers,
fought with pistols near Paris, and the former was
wounded in the leg. In 1790 Barnave fought a* duel
with Viscount de Noailles with pistols, but neither
received serious injuries. Oliver St. John, of the
house of Bolingbroke, and Captain Best, of the
Queen's Guards, fought with swords in 1589, in
England, and Best was killed. In 1760, in England,
James Stewart and the Duke of Bolton met at Mary-
lebone Fields with swords. Bolton had wounded his
antagonist, and while making a desperate pass fell
and broke his leg, and was unable to rise. " Get up

2IO THE FIELD OF HONOR.

or beg for your life!" cried Stewart. " Never!" ex-
claimed the Duke. And thus the combat ended.

On June i, 1790, Mr. Macduff captain's clerk of
the British sloop-of-war Racehorse, and midshipman
Prince, of the same vessel, fought in England, and
the latter was killed at the first fire. On the 3d of
July of the same year Mr. John Alcock and Mr. Sewell
met with pistols at Guilford (England), and fired at
each other once without effect. They then fired a
second time, when Sewell's pistol went off accident-
ally, and the bullet went through his own foot, while
the ball from his antagonist's weapon passed through
the skirt of his coat. The seconds then arranged the
matter with satisfaction to both parties. On the 6th
day of the same month Lieutenants Cowper and Dyer,
of the Fifty-Sixth Regiment of English Foot, met
near Dublin, and the latter was severely wounded at
the first shot. On the 2oth of the same month, same
year, Mr. Stephens, a young gentleman of twenty
years of age (and only surviving son of Philip
Stephens, of the Admiralty), and Mr. Anderson, an
attorney, met at Margate (England), and exchanged
shots without effect. The seconds then interposed,
but Stephens insisted on an apology from his adver-
sary. Mr. Anderson replied that he could not apolo-
gize for words he had never used. Whereupon
Stephens demanded another shot, and received his
antagonist's bullet in the head and fell dead. On
August 3, 1772, near Paris, between Marquis de Fleur
and Captain Cardineaux, in which the latter was
killed and the former wounded in the arm ; weapons,
pistols. On the i6th of May, 1767, at Marseilles
(France), between Signor Romanza (a Corsican) and
the Duke of Triffonier. The latter had made

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 211

derogatory remarks about the British nation and its
sovereign, to which Romanza responded by saying
that the British nation was a nation of men, and that
the King was the best monarch in Europe; for which
declaration Triffonier challenged the Corsican, and
received a mortal wound; weapons, pistols. On the
3d of August, 1769, at Plymouth (England), two
English officers (a captain and a lieutenant of ma-
rines) went out with each other to dine, during which
they got into an intoxicated condition, and afterward
quarrelled and fougnt each other, the lieutenant
being killed; weapons, swords. In August, 1769, in
Dunmore Park, near Kilkenny (Ireland), a second
duel took place between James Agar and Henry
Flood (the former having been wounded in the arm
in the first affair), in which Agar was shot through
the heart. The second quarrel grew out of a con-
troversy over the loss of a case of duelling pistols.
Agar fired first, and then took up a second weapon,
and cried out to Flood, who was about to discharge
his pistol in the air: "Fire, you scoundrel, fire!"
And Flood did fire, and Agar never knew what
killed him.

In August, 1779, Major Ackland and Lieutenant
Lloyd, of the British army, fought near London,
with pistols, and the former was killed. Lloyd had
charged the American people with ingratitude and
cowardice, and Ackland, in defending the Americans,
gave Lloyd the lie, which resulted as aforesaid. On
the nth of September, 1765, two gentlemen, who had
long been intimate friends, quarrelled and fought
with swords near Kensington (England), and both
were severely wounded. One of the combatants, after
arriving upon the field, drew from his pocket his will,

212 - THE FIELD OF HONOR.

in which he had bequeathed to his antagonist ^1000;
and which he declared he would not take back. The
duel was proceeded with, however.

In Hyde Park, in 1748, Captains Innes and Clarke,
officers in the British navy, fought with pistols, and
the former was mortally wounded. The survivor was
afterward tried and convicted of murder, but was
pardoned by the King. The same year Mr. Ball, an
attorney, fought the Earl of Kilkenny with pistols, in
Ireland, and the latter was wounded twice. In 1825,
Alphonse de Lamartine, the celebrated French poet,
and Colonel Pepe, an officer in the Italian army,
fought near Florence (Italy), and Lamartine was
seriously wounded. In 1794 Colonel Roper and
Lieutenant Purefoy, officers of the same regiment in
the British army, met near London with pistols, and
Roper was shot through the heart. In 1850, M.
Valentine and M. Clary, members of the Chamber of
Deputies, fought with swords near Brussels, and the
former was dangerously wounded.

On the 24th of November, 1849, M. Pierre Bona-
parte fought M. Rovigo (whose face he had slapped
publicly) with sabres, in the Bois de Boulogne, and
was wounded. A day or two afterward he exchanged
shots with Adrian de la Valette, a Parisian journalist,
in the woods near Paris, without injury to either. In
1851 M. Pierre Bonaparte and the Count Nienkerke
met with swords in the Bois de Boulogne, and the
latter was sevely wounded in the thigh.

On the 24th of February, 1832, in Paris, Charles
Leon, a natural son of Napoleon, dined with M. de
Rosambert, and met, at dinner, Captain Hesse.
During the evening play was introduced, and Leon
lost eighteen thousand francs; after which, he quar-

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 21$

relied with Hesse, and the two arranged for a duel,
which was fought in the woods upon the following
morning, and Hesse was mortally wounded. On the
i9th of March. 1830, Captain Smith, of the Thirty-
second Foot, British army, and Standish Stamer
O'Grady — accompanied respectively by Captain
Markham and Lieutenant Macnamara — met with
pistols near Dublin, and O'Grady was shot dead.
Subsequently Captains Smith and Markham were
arrested and tried for murder, and convicted of man-
slaughter and sentenced to twelve months' imprison-
ment in Kilmainham jail. Smith, after listening to
the sentence, cried out, "My God! my God! I am
disgraced forever!" and fell into Markham's arms.

In 1835 Morgan O'Connell, Member of Parliament,
and Lord Alvanley fought in Hyde Park with pistols,
and fired at each other three times without effect. In
1853 M. Charles Moncelet and M. Emile Angier met
near Paris and settled their difficulty by firing at
each other once without effect. In 1731 Lord Hervey
and William Pulteney fought with swords near Bath,
and the former was slightly wounded. In 1822 the
Duke of Bedford and the Duke of Buckingham met
in Hyde Park with pistols. The Duke of Bucking-
ham fired without effect, and his antagonist dis-
charged his pistol in the air. In 1849 M. Berard and
M. Brives, members of the Chamber of Deputies, met
near Paris with pistols, and satisfied honor after one
shot from Brives; Berard's weapon missing fire. In
1833, in England, Sir John Jeffcott and Captain Hen-
nis fought with pistols, and the latter was mortally
wounded. In 1835, after a quarrel in the Cortez,
Sefior Mendizabal, Prime Minister of Spain, and

214 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Sefior Isturitz, fought with pistols near Madrid, and
exchanged shots without effect.

On the 7th of December, 1883, Signers Levito and
Nicotera met with sabres near the iron bridge which
spans the Tiber, at Rome; and, after a desperate en-
counter, the former was dangerously wounded in the
heart. The seconds then endeavored to terminate
the affair, when Levito suddenly rushed forward,
snatched Nicotera's sabre away and slashed the un-
armed man a deadly blow over his head and neck,
from which he died in a short time afterward. The
New York Times, in noticing this affair, said:

The killing of Baron Nicotera, although it took place in
a duel, was a murder, or rather a bloody butchery, for his
antagonist killed him in a way which involved a total disre-
gard of the "code," and which will probably result in the
homicide's trial and condemnation by a criminal court.
The death of Nicotera is an event of no little political im-
portance. He led a small party in Parliament which was
absolutely devoted to his interests, and his hold on his
Calabrian constituents, being purely personal, could not be
shaken, whatever political somersaults he might have made.
Nominally a leader of the Left, he fought for his own ad-
vantage, and his readiness either to ally himself with any
party that would purchase his services or to attack any
Ministry or measure, made him a factor in politics that no
party or statesman could entirely ignore. There is no
principle nor programme that loses by his death, but the
complete extinction of the Nicotera group which it necessa-
rily involves will simplify the problem of parliamentary
government. Nicotera was a picturesque figure in the
rapidly diminishing ranks of the Italian revolutionary pa-
triots. He belonged to the era — now happily closed — of
Italian conspirators. During the greater part of his turbu-
lent life he was always conspiring or fighting against tyr-
j and he began this course so young that by the time he

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

was twenty he was an exile from Naples and had been
wounded by a French bullet while fighting for the Roman
Republic of '48. Twenty years more were passed by him in
the underground work of the Italian secret societies, and at
the end of that time he was captured and condemned, first
to death and afterward to the galleys for life, for having
made one of an armed band sent out by Mazzini to face
almost certain death by landing in Southern Italy and at-
tempting to incite an insurrection against the king. Liber-
ated by the Sicilian revolt, Nicotera was sent by Bertani to
head an expedition against Rome. The expedition was os-
tensibly a Garibaldian movement, but was undertaken with-
out the knowledge of Garibaldi, and was afterward de-
nounced by him as a specimen of the folly of republican
doctrinaires. It was broken up by the Sardinian Govern-
ment, and Nicotera thereupon joined Garibaldi in South
Italy. At Aspromonte he was with the simple-minded
hero whom Rattazzi had lured into loyal rebellion ; for there
is now no question that Garibaldi was made to believe
that in engaging in the Aspromonte campaign he was really
obeying the wishes of Victor Emmanuel. Such a man —
able, fearless, trained to conflict with authority — was not
the man to suddenly develop into a statesman. Nicotera
was a* guerrilla in politics as he had been in war, and he
never learned that there could be virtue in obedience to
law. As Minister of the Interior his manipulation of elec-
tions was more reckless and shameless than anything of the
kind ever perpetrated by an imperialist Prefect in the early
days of the last French Empire, and it stained his reputa-
tion ineffaceably. Had he lived, he could have had no
reasonable prospect of ever again entering an Italian Cab-
inet. His political career after his withdrawal from office
was that of a clever, unscrupulous trickster, and with the
growth of true parliamentary government his influence as
the leader of a group would have steadily diminished.
There was one touch of chivalry in the veteran conspirator.
The magic of the beautiful Italian queen made him, repub-
lican as he was, thoroughly loyal to the throne ; and that

2l6 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the queen could have exerted this influence over such a
man without the loss of dignity or the slightest breath of
suspicion is not the least of her claims to the respect and
love of her people. The conspirators with whom Nicotera
belonged, and of a certain class of whom he was a type, will
soon have passed out of the political life of Italy. In their
day they did good service, and those whose freedom was in
large measure won by the bravery and sufferings of these
men can well afford to pardon the offences that die with
them. With all his faults Nicotera never hesitated to
brave the gallows and to face the bullets of the enemies of
Italian freedom. He was useless and out of place as a law-
maker ; but before the Italian Parliament was born he had
worthily filled a place among the soldiers of freedom. Italy
will be less heroic when the men of Mazzinian conspiracies
and red-shirt campaigns are gone; but the cause of good
government loses nothing by the death of the bold, restless,
and reckless Calabrian Baron.

A special cablegram to the New York Herald from
Paris, dated the loth of January, 1884, presented the
following spirited description of the duel between
two famous Parisians, as follows:

The duel between M. Aurelien Scholl, the witty chroni-
queur of the Evtnement, and Count Albert de Dion, a prom-
inent ornament of the gayest coterie of Parisian society,
took place at noon yesterday. To-day it exclusively absorbs
the attention of Paris. The cause of the duel originated
four years ago, and is too complicated to be unravelled in a
telegraphic summary. Readers of the Herald will doubtless
recall the scene at the famous restaurant Bignon in 1880,
when the Count de Dion threw a bottle of champagne at
M. Scholl's head and otherwise roughly handled him. The
Count de Dion was for this assault locked up in jail for two
months. When the Count de Dion came out M. Scholl's
two seconds waited upon him. The Count de Dion was
most eager to fight, but in Belgium, not in France, as the

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

cumulative punishment for a duel on top of an assault and
battery would be too serious a matter. M. Scholl, on the
other hand, refused to go to Belgium. Hence the status
quo was maintained until last week, when the Count de
Dion fought a duel with M. de Bryas. This duel fanned
into activity the latent fire of M. Scholl concerning the im-
broglio with the Count de Dion, and on Tuesday M. Scholl
published in the Evenement a sarcastic appreciation, of the
Count de Dion, headed " A Surprise." The Count de Dion
never reads the Evtnement, but the next day (yesterday)
his friend M. Sohege showed him M. Scholl's provoking
sarcasm. The Count de Dion did not allow the grass to
grow under his feet, and ten minutes after reading the
article he sent the General Prince de Bauffremont and
Commandant Franchet d'Esperet as seconds to demand
reparation of M. Scholl, who referred those gentlemen to
his own seconds, MM. Robert Mitchell and Adolphe Taver-
nier. The following is the narrative of the details of the
duel as related to your correspondent by one of the four
seconds who officiated on the occasion : The duel took
place at noon near the grand stand of the race-course of
Longchamps. We wanted it to take place in the pesage,
but when we arrived with our principals the keepers said
that the proprietors of the race-course would not allow any
duelling to take place on their property. So we were
obliged to go further. We halted finally in one of the
retired and picturesque promenades of the Bois. M. Taver-
nier tossed up a louis for the choice of position. Prince
Bauffremont cried " Head !" and won. M. Tavern ier then
tossed up again a louis for the choice of weapons. Prince
Bauffremont cried " Head !" and again won. The Count
de Dion then selected his position and chose his own
weapons, a magnificent pair of swords with costly steel
guards ornamented with his initials and the coronet of the
count embossed in solid gold. M. Tavernier, to whom we
delegated the direction of the combat, put the adversaries
in position and engaged their swords. At the command,
" Allez, Messieurs /" the two combatants took ground en

218 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

rampant. Then M. Scholl attacked furiously with right
points and thrusts. The Count de Dion all the while smiled
most ironically and parried M. Scholl's attacks with highly
finished but rather fantastic play, frequently tantalizing his
adversary by raising his sword quite out of position of guard,
for an instant completely exposing himself. M. Scholl
made play at the chest, the Count de Dion at the stomach.
At the expiration of four minutes M. Tavernier, believing
that the Count de Dion was wounded in the wrist, stopped
the combat, but it was merely the Count de Dion's shirt
sleeve which had been torn. At the second engagement
the adversaries ceased to rompre and the play was more
earnest. M. Scholl continued to attack vigorously and
nearly succeeded in wounding the Count de Dion, but the
latter very adroitly sprang back, missing the point by a
hair's breadth. The combat continued in the most spirited
manner imaginable. M. Scholl kept advancing and making
play at the Count de Dion's chest, followed by a well-exe-
cuted degagement dans la tigne basse. The Count de Dion
always responded by the riposte en seconde after each pas-
sage. Finally, by a beautiful riposte du tac au tac the
Count de Dion wounded M. Scholl in the side, his sword
entering between the eighth and ninth ribs. The sword
bending, broke at twenty centimetres from its point, the
broken piece remaining in the wound. M. Scholl stepped
back, saying " Je laisse." We seconds all approached, anx-
ious to see if the wound was dangerous. M. Scholl smiled,
and said, " I have had worse wounds than this," referring to
a severe wound in the chest received from M. Paul de Cas-
sagnac. "That's what comes of being so near-sighted,"
continued M. Scholl. Your correspondent here asked —
" What was the real feeling of the adversaries before and
after the combat?" The second answered — "They both
did their best to kill each other." " Was there a reconcilia-
tion ?" " No ; but before the combat we seconds insisted
that our respective principals should formally agree that
this duel would finally settle the quarrel." " Is M. Scholl's
wound serious ?" " No ; he went at five o'clock to Tortoni's

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS, 2ig

as usual, and then went to his editorial chair in the
Evtnement"

Rossi was playing Hamlet one night at Casala,
when a party of young Italians of both sexes, who
had dined too copiously, spoke so loud that the actor
was obliged to stop. "I'll keep quiet until you do,"
said the tragedian, quietly folding his arms. The
public applauded and demanded the expulsion of the
disturbers, but after the performance Signor Rossi
found a card left with the stage doorkeeper. The
owner of it insisted upon satisfaction for the insult.
Signor Rossi pulled a long face. He did not mind a
duel, but he was expected next night at Milan and
was bound to start at eight o'clock in the morning.
He went straight to the residence of the challenger,
whom he found engaged in trying his skill with a
pair of pistols on an iron plate fixed against the wall.
He explained the situation to him. " The rumor of
a duel between us has already gone abroad; the gen-
darmerie are sure to prevent us in the morning. I
have a very spacious apartment at the hotel. Will
you come and settle our quarrel there ? We are not
likely to be disturbed, especially if we can manage to
slip in unnoticed." So said, so done. They repaired
to Signor Rossi's hotel; the conditions had been ar-
ranged; and they were just about to begin when there
was a knock at the door. It was the host, who, see-
ing a light so late, feared that his visitor was ill, and
would not accept his assurance to the contrary for an
answer. " There is but one way out of the difficulty
— we must blow out the candles and take aim by the
glow of our cigarettes we are going to light." The
condition was accepted ; Signor Rossi hit his adver-
sary in the shoulder, but the discharge awakened the

220 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

whole house. The tragedian had got from the fry-
ing-pan into the fire, for he was conducted to the
juge de paix. In vain did he consult his watch ; the
hands pointed to seven. To make matters worse, the
magistrate received him with a crushing speech.
"You deserve five years' imprisonment," he began.
"But now that the man of the law has spoken," he
continued, suddenly changing his tone, " the playgoer
must add a last word. I was at the theatre last
night ; you acted like a god and you did very well to
chastise this good-for-nothing. I know that you are
expected in Milan, and take this ring as a remem-
brance of how I look upon your conduct."

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 221

CHAPTER XII.

EUROPEAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

A Fight to the Death— The Fatal Duel between O'Connell and
D'Esterre — A Combat with Cavalry Sabres — Harry Bellasses
and Tom Porter— An Old-Time Duel— All about the Countess
of Yarmouth — Aston and Fitzgerald — A Number of Fatal Duels
— Fighting Musicians — A Fatal Encounter with Scissors — Killed
and Left in the Street — Midshipmen Armstrong and Long —
General Pepe and Caraocosa — Duels from Trivial Causes — A
Disrespectful Frenchman Neatly Dispatched — The Desperate
Encounter between Valois and Bezarier — A Spectacular Combat
and its Tragic Result — Two Desperate Affairs— Extraordinary
and Fatal Duel — Atrocities of the Field.

DURING an animated discussion between Lieu-
tenants Zigang and Suprin, of the One Hundred and
Thirteenth (French) Infantry, concerning military
matters, early in September, 1881, at Paris, the former
gave his brother officer the lie, and was dealt a violent
blow in the face in return. A duel was the conse-
quence; and the parties met, with pistols, on the
twelfth of the month, at Saules, between the rivers
Sanitas and Loire. The combatants confronted each
other at thirty paces, and at the signal both fired and
both fell — Zigang hit in the hip and his antagonist in
the breast. They were then conveyed to the hospital,
where Suprin died in a few days.

When Henry III. was king of France there were
among his courtiers two gentlemen who were noted

222 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

as masters of the sword — Caylus and D'Entraquet.
During a night's dissipation, in which his majesty was
a jolly participant, Caylus and D'Entraquet quarrelled
over cards, and the latter accused the former of cheat-
ing, and threw his glove in Caylus' face. Caylus
sprang upon D'Entraquet like a tiger and seized him
by the throat, but in an instant the two courtiers were
separated by friends. "I'll have your life for this!"
cried Caylus, in great rage. "Well said, sir — to
Fourelles, then, at once," responded D'Entraquet.
Arrangements were quickly made for a meeting at
Fourelles early upon the following day, with two sec-
onds on each side. Morning came (writes a contributor
to an English magazine), and no sooner had the seconds
arranged all the preliminaries than the principals
confronted each other and their shining blades glided
into collision. For some moments neither gained any
advantage. Then every movement was cautious, for
each wished to learn the skill and power of his oppo-
nent. Caylus was the first to break ground. He
made a rapid parry, and lunged like lightning at his
opponent. A thrust so quick and true that only by
a desperate backward spring did the latter escape.
Again the swords crossed, and steel played along
steel till Caylus, seeing an opportunity, made a leap
and thrust, and his sword was beaten down when
only within an inch of his enemy's heart. It was
clearly evident now that Caylus was by far the most
expert swordsman of the two, and nothing but
D'Entraquet's strength of wrist had saved him from
receiving a deadly wound. That strength stood him
in good stead, and he was determined to exert it to
the utmost. D'Entraquet now pressed his antagonist
heavily and closely, thrust following thrust in rapid

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 22$

succession. Soon the strength of Caylus began to
fail him, and his defence grew weaker as D'Entraquet,
seeming to gather strength, pressed him hotly. The
seconds resolved to interpose. " Enough," they cried.
" Honor is satisfied, what more would you have ?"
D'Entraquet seemed inclined to listen to this sugges-
tion; not so Caylus. He smiled, and waved the sec-
onds back with a gesture of contempt. " Our quar-
rel cannot be so easily appeased. Fall back ! we
fight to the death!" he cried. "Be it so," said
D'Entraquet; "your blood be on your own head, not
mine." And bearing down the point of his antago-
nist's sword with a straight thrust, delivered with all
his strength, he drove the cold steel through the breast
of his enemy with such force that the point came out
at his back. That thrust was a fatal one. Caylus
stood for one brief second, and then dropped dead.

There are Irish writers who have stated that the
Count d'Esterre was imported for the sole purpose of
killing the famous Daniel O'Connell. Be this as it
may, it was not long after d'Esterre became a member
of the corporation of Dublin that the illustrious Irish-
man referred to that body as " a beggarly corpora-
tion." This was the Count's opportunity; and he
quickly embraced it by sending O'Connell a challenge.
This was duly accepted, although O'Connell declared
that the meeting was party subterfuge to cut him off.
The Count was known to be a dead shot, while no one
would have wagered a shilling on O'Connell, who had
never fought a duel, and who was at best an in-
different marksman. After taking their stand, arid
getting the signal, the parties fired so nearly together
that it seemed like one report, and d'Esterre fell mor-
tally wounded, while O'Connell escaped unhurt. This

224 THE PI ELD OF HONOR.

took place at Bishop's Court, in 1815. In 1829, while
Sir Robert Peel was Secretary for Ireland, O'Connell
called the distinguished statesman the " son of a cot-
ton-jenny," which resulted in an agreement fora meet-
ing, which was prevented by the proper authorities.
Subsequently the parties made preparations to depart
for France, but the " Irish Liberator" was arrested
while on his way from Dublin and held on bail not to
fight.

In 1852, in Paris, M. Laury and M. Vieyra quar-
relled in a billiard saloon, and agreed to settle their
grievance at sunrise the following morning at a stated
place in the woods near the city, the weapons to be:
first, pistols, at twelve paces; and then, second (if
neither was hit), to advance with cavalry sabres.
After arriving upon the ground, it was arranged that
the combatants should proceed at once with their
sabres, as the reports of firearms might bring the
authorities (who were on the track of the parties)
quickly to the scene of action. The duel lasted twenty
minutes, when Vieyra was severely wounded in the
breast.

A singular duel was that in London, in 1677, between
Sir Henry Bellasses and Thomas Porter. Like Camel-
ford and Best, Harry Bellasses and Tom Porter were
genial fellows, and fond of the good things of the
world. They met, with some other fellows, one even-
ing, and dined at Jack Castle's, in Spring Garden.
Slight intoxication soon followed, and Bellasses and
Porter had words, during which the former gave the
latter a light slap upon the face. At this, one of the
company, who were all by this time nearly intoxicated,
sprang up at once, crying: "Tom, I wouldn't stand a
blow." "Nor will I!" cried Tom Porter, staggering

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 22$

to his feet. " Sir Harry, a word with you. Bellasses
looked at him aghast. "What, Tom !" said he, " are
you going to quarrel ?" "No. Quarrel!" he cried,
" I am not going to quarrel. I have quarrelled —
follow me." "I will not fight you!" Sir Henry re-
plied; and making for the door he rushed into the
street. A coach was passing, into which he leaped,
and, just as Tom Porter came rushing out urged on
by the words of his friends, he cried: " Up the Strand,
and then to Covent Garden." " Ha, ha !" cried Tom
Porter, now maddened by drink and excitement.
" Did you hear ? He is going round by Covent Gar-
den. We can cut across and meet him." In the still
small hours of the morning, just before the market
became alive with people, Tom Porter met the coach,
and, calling out, " Coward," and stopping it faced Sir
Henry and challenged him to fight a duel. " You are
mad, Tom !" he cried, drawing his sword as Porter
flung his coat and vest to the ground; "but as you
will it, be it so." The duel, founded on nothing, and
urged on by foolish men, was not many minutes in
duration, and presently Tom Porter's sword ran into
the breast of his bosom friend, who fell, bathed in
blood, to the ground. In an instant, when he beheld
the form of his comrade fall death-struck to the earth,
Porter saw his crime, and fell on his knees weeping at
the side of his friend. " Forgive me — I was mad,
Harry," he cried, in broken accents. "Away, Tom;
save yourself," cried Bellasses. "I forgive you.
Fools have wrought this between us." And dragged
away by his friends Tom Porter was placed in a
coach, forced down to Dover and away to France.

During the reign of Henry the Second, of France,
Jthere was a famous duel between Baron des Guerres

226 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and Seigneur Fondelles, in which the former was de-
feated and badly wounded. They fought with swords,
and both received many desperate cuts. There were
many thousands of people present, and during the
progress of the combat a scaffold fell containing spec-
tators, and a number of ladies were seriously injured.

In 1750, two German noblemen, named Swiegel and
Freychappel, who were visiting England, fell desper-
ately in love with the beautiful Countess of Yarmouth
(then a mistress of George II.), and, becoming greatly
enraged with each other, in consequence, repaired to
Hyde Park one morning with swords for the purpose
of settling their differences in the premises of love.
The combat lasted nearly an hour, during the prog-
ress of which both were many times wounded.
Freychappel, at last, while rushing furiously upon his
antagonist, slipped and fell, and was instantly run
through and killed.

On the 29th of June, 1790, Captain Harvey Aston
and Lieutenant Fitzgerald, of the Sixtieth Regiment
of (English) Foot, who had quarrelled a long time
before at Ranelagh, met in a field at Chalk-lodge farm,
near Hampstead, at the break of day, with pistols;
Aston being seconded by Lord Fitzroy, and Fitzgerald
by Mr. Wood. They fought at ten paces; and Fitz-
gerald, having the first fire, rested his pistol on his
left arm, and took an aim which sent a bullet through
his antagonist's neck. On receiving the wound,
Aston called to his antagonist, without firing: " Are
you satisfied?" The answer returned was: "lam
satisfied." Mr. Aston was then assisted to his car-
riage suffering greatly from his wound, which was a
very severe one. On the 28th of June, 1796, Lord
Valentia and Henry Gawler met in a field three miles

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 22 ?

from Hamburgh, and Valentia was wounded in the
breast at the first fire, while his lordship's bullet
passed through the hat of his antagonist. On the
loth of August, 1796, two Americans named William
Carpenter and John Pride fought in Hyde Park,
London, and the former was shot through the body
and died the next day. The coroner's jury rendered
a verdict of wilful murder, but Pride was acquitted
upon trial.

On January 12, 1818, near Chalk-farm, Mr. O'Cal-
laghan and Lieutenant Bayley, of the Fifty-eighth
British Foot; they fought with pistols, and Bayley
was mortally wounded. O'Callaghan and the two
seconds were charged with murder by a coroner's
jury, and at their trial were convicted of man-
slaughter. In the duel between Redmond Byrne and
Thomas O'Connor, near Cork (Ireland), in July, 1820,
a spectator at a distance of a quarter of a mile re-
ceived one of the shots in the arm, while neither of
the principals was hurt. On December 13, 1817, in
Northwood Park, Isle of Wight, John Sutton and
Major Lockyer; the former was killed at the first fire.
The coroner's jury returned a verdict of wilful
murder against Lockyer and the two seconds, all of
whom fled the country. On July 19, 1813, near Park-
hurst Barracks (England), Edward McGuire and
Lieutenant Blundell; they fought with pistols, and
Blundell was killed. McGuire and the seconds were
convicted of murder and sentenced to death, but the
sentence was commuted to imprisonment. In 1728,
in England, Captain Peppard, of the British army,
and Mr. Hayes, an attorney, met at Hyde Park, with
swords, and Hayes was killed. In 1748, in Hyde
Park, Messrs. Morgan and Hamilton, with swords;

228 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the latter killed. On November 13, 1779, in England,
Mr. Donovan and Captain Hanson; the latter killed.
In Paris, in 1862, the Due de Grammont Caderousse
and Mr. Dillon, a journalist; the latter killed. In
1788, in England, Mr. McKeon and George Nugent
Reynolds, in which the latter was killed and the
former convicted of murder. In England, in 1802,
Right Honorable George Ogle and Bernard Coyle;
the latter slightly wounded at the eighth shot. In
1861, in Berlin, General de Manteuffel and M. Twes-
ten, with pistols, at eleven paces. At the first shot
the General was grazed in the head, and at the
second his antagonist was wounded in the wrist.
These gentlemen held prominent positions under the
King, who was highly indignant over their offence.

In 1711, in England, Mr. Thornhill and Sir Chol-
meley Dering; they fought with pistols, and the
Baronet was killed at the first fire. In France, in
1851, M. Chavoix and M. Dupont; they fought with
swords, and the latter was slain. In 1752, in Eng-
land, Lord Lempster and Captain Grey, of the
British army, with swords; Lempster was run
through the body and died while being taken to his
carriage. In 1851, in England, Viscount Maiden and
Captain Hawkins, with pistols; the officer fired and
missed, and his lordship discharged his weapon in
the air. In 1854, in France, M. Alphonse and M.
Isidore, with swords; Isidore was severely wounded.
In 1495, the Emperor Maximilian, of Germany, and
Claude de Batre, with swords; the latter was de-
feated. In 1789, at Wimbledon, the Duke of York
(afterward George the Fourth) and Colonel Lenox
(afterward the Duke of Richmond), with pistols. The
latter fired first arid disarranged a lock of his noble

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

antagonist's hair, and the Duke of York discharged
his pistol in the air. Theophilus Swift, an Irish at-
torney, upon learning of the meeting, although unac-
quainted with Colonel Lenox, declared that the latter
ought to be challenged and made to fight until some
one killed him for having dared to fire upon a son of
the King; and he issued a cartel of defiance accord-
ingly. Lenox accepted the challenge, the parties
met, and Swift was shot through the body at the first
fire. In 1647, in Scotland, Donald McCallum and
Colkitto Alister, with swords; McCallum was desper-
ately wounded and died the following day. In 1714,
in Ireland, Cornet Castine and Dudley Moore, with
swords; Moore was killed. In 1764, in England, the
Duke of Pecquigny and M. Virette, with swords; the
former was badly wounded. In 1503, in Spain, the
Chevalier Bayard and Alonzo de Sotomayor. Bayard
issued the challenge, and the parties met with swords
and daggers, and after a desperate struggle the
Spaniard was killed.

Ole Bull, one of the greatest violinists that ever
lived, fought and killed a fellow musician in Paris in
I^37- Jullien, the eminent musical director, just be-
fore sailing for America, in 1853, fought a duel near
Paris, and was run through the body and taken off
the field for dead. In 1851, at Versailles, Prince
Charles Bonaparte and Count Rossi, with pistols;
neither hit. In 1660, in England, Sir William Gray
and the Earl of Southesk, with swords; the former
killed. James Bruce, the distinguished traveller,
fought a duel with a gentleman at Brussels, and
wounded his adversary several times, in 1757;
weapons, swords. The first Sir Colin Campbell was
killed by the Lord of Lorn, in Scotland, in 1291. Sir

230 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

James Johnston and Lord Maxwell, in Scotland, in
1613; the former slain. In Ireland, in 1808, Mr. Al-
cock and Mr. Colclough; they fought with pistols,
and Colclough was shot dead at the first fire.

On February 26, 1812, in Ireland, O. Joynt and P.
McKim; they fought with pistols, and the latter was
killed at the first fire. On January 3, 1806, near Not-
tingham (England), Ensigns Brown and Butler, of
the British army; Brown was shot through the heart
and Butler fled the country. On May 5, 1807, at
Combe Wood, near Wimbledom Common, James
Paull and Sir Francis Burdette; they fought with
pistols, and Burdette was severely wounded in the
thigh at the second shot. On June 8, 1807, on the
Strand, at Ferrybank, near Wexford (Ireland),
Thomas McCoard and Standish Lowquay; the latter
wounded in the groin at the second shot. In Sep-
tember, 1820, two young gentlemen named Fenshaw
and Hartinger fought with pistols on the Ascot-heath
race-course (England), and at the third fire both fell
dangerously wounded. On April 14, 1813, two French
prisoners-of-war on board the English prisonship
Sampson fought with scissors tied to ends of brush
handles, and battled desperately for an hour, when
one of them fell dead, while the survivor was cut
in forty places.

On the 2ist of September, 1806, in Hyde Park,
Baron Hornpesch and Mr. Richardson; the latter was
shot dead at the first fire. On the i2th of October,
of the same year, Midshipman Armstrong, of the
Prince of Wales, and Midshipman Long, of the Resist-
ance, quarrelled at dinner, at Plymouth, and went out
and fought with pistols, and Long was killed and left
in the street, where he was found by the Port Ad-

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

miral about ten o'clock. Armstrong was charged
with murder by the coroner's jury, and sent to jail in
chains. In 1823, in England, near Kew bridge, Gen-
eral Pepe and General Carascosa; they fought with
swords, and Carascosa was severely wounded in the
right shoulder. In 1851, near Bologne, John Petit
and George Roussell; they fired twice without effect,
but at the third shot the former was killed.

In 1743, in Italy, two Italian noblemen (the Mar-
quis Bagnesi and Marquis Strozzi) fought with
swords, and both were badly wounded. The duel
grew out of a quarrel over a small gambling debt.
A still more trivial cause for a duel was that of Mr.
MacDonnell, who got enraged at Lieutenant McLeod,
at a ball, in Scotland, in 1790, because the latter
"gave him an impertinent look;" and for this
MacDonnell struck the officer with a cane and drove
him out of the room. McLeod at once challenged
the offender, and the parties met, near Edinburgh,
with pistols, the following morning. Before taking
their places, MacDonnell said to McLeod: " Lieuten-
ant, I am fully convinced that I was in the wrong
last night, and I am willing to make a proper apol-
ogy." McLeod turned to his second, who claimed
that MacDonnell should also submit to the same pun-
ishment that he had inflicted upon McLeod, which
terms were not acceded to; after which they fired at
each other, and the officer was killed. MacDonnell
was at once arrested and tried on a charge of murder,
but was acquitted.

Wraxhall, in his " Memoirs," relates a very interest-
ing account of a duel which took place in Germany,
while the Earl of Stair commanded the British army
in that country, in which Lord Mark Kerr (Stair's

232 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

nephew) neatly disposed of an ungentlemanly
Frenchman. The quarrel grew out of misconduct
at a dinner on the part of a French officer, thus:

A difference of opinion having arisen during the repast,
on some point which was maintained by one of the French
officers with great pertinacity, Lord Mark Kerr, in a very
gentle tone of voice, ventured to set him right on the
matter of fact. But the Frenchman, unconscious of his
quality, and perhaps thinking that a frame so delicate did
not enclose a high spirit, contradicted him in the most gross
terms, such as are neither used nor submitted to among
gentlemen. The circumstance took place so near to Lord
Stair as unavoidably to attract his attention. No notice
whatever was taken of it at the time, and after dinner the
company adjourned to another tent, where coffee was served.
Lord Mark coming in about a quarter of an hour later than
the others, Lord Stair no sooner observed him, than, calling
him aside: " Nephew," said he, " I think it impossible for
you to pass by the affront that you have received from the
French officer at my table. You must demand satisfaction,
however much I regret the necessity of it." " O, my lord,"
answered Lord Mark, with his characteristic gentleness of
manner, 'you need not be under any uneasiness on that
subject. We have already fought. I ran him through the
body. He died on the spot, and they are at this moment
about to bury him. I knew too well what I owed myself,
and I was too well convinced of your lordship's way of think-
ing to lose a moment in calling the officer to account.

One of the most memorable, as well as one of
the most desperate, duels in the annals of France
took place in Paris during the reign of Henry the
Fourth between Lagarde Valois (a gambler, roue,
and swash-buckler) and Constant Bezarier. The
former had stabbed a lad named Chretien, whom
he had attempted to rob, at a restaurant; and during
the melee Bezarier, a friend of the young nobleman,

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 233

precipitated himself into the room, just as Valois was
making his exit. Despatching a domestic for a sur-
geon, Bezarier took off Chretien's hat, with its rich
ostrich plume, and attaching a slip of paper to it,
with the words, " Thou thrice-accursed coward, Valois,
meet me, Bezarier, and wear this hat, if thou darest,"
he sent it by his own servant to Valois' lodgings, and
then looked carefully to his sword and dagger, and
left for the " Three Brothers," the residence of his
friend .Chretien. He had only proceeded, however,
as far as the Church of the Sacred Heart when he
saw approaching him Valois himself, with the identi-
cal hat on his head. It was a lonely road, and there
was ample room there for two desperate men bent on
fighting a duel to the death. In an instant their
swords were drawn, and they sternly saluted each
other. The next and the blades crossed. For some
minutes each man feinted and lunged in turn, and did
his utmost to discover the strength of his adversary's
resources. Then there was a quick pass or two, then
an involuntary pause. " We meet sooner than I
expected," said Valois, his face aglow with the
delight of battle. " I knew the Sieur Bezarier would
keep his promise to meet me, but I did not expect to
see him again before sunset." " You are a liar and a
cur," retorted Bezarier, sternly, " and may think
yourself fortunate that I condescend to cross swords
with you. Shake not your head in that way, man;
I know you ! Him you did breakfast with, and ply
with wine, and afterwards rob, he was my friend, and
I am about to be his avenger. Therefore, make your
peace with Heaven, for short is the shrift I shall allow
you." "Fool!" retorted Valois, white with rage.
" Who are you, that, on the repute of a few chance

234 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

encounters with obscure men, would face the best
swordsman in Paris ? I hurl your defiance back in
your teeth. Have at you, now!" With that he
raised his sword, and with a quick and nimble rush
broke over Bezarier's guard, and wounded him in the
forehead. " How like you that ?" he demanded.
Bezarier made no answer, but quietly wiping the
blood from his face, smiled disdainfully, and ad-
vanced to the attack. Again the swords crossed.
In mere skill and dexterity the combatants were
pretty evenly balanced, but Valois was the most
active and by far the stronger of the two. Twice
had the point of his sword swept like lightning
within an inch of Bezarier's heart, and only by the
merest good fortune did the latter escape untouched.
But his coolness and resolution, his patience and per-
tinacity, never left him. Even these tokens of
his adversary's superiority failed to provoke him to
be indiscreet. He parried Valois' impetuous outsets
with a calm courage that left nothing to be desired.
For the third time they closed. Though Bezarier
was bleeding freely from the wound he had received,
he bated no jot of his vigilance — eye, foot and hand
were equally firm and true. Evidently it was his
design to tire out Valois before he attempted any
serious effort on his own account. Of this Valois
soon became aware, and his curses were frequent and
deep. Once more he made a savage rush, and though
Bezarier parried it, the exertion seemed to tire him,
and he hung longer on the other's blade than was
altogether safe. Valois noticed it. Quick as
thought he disengaged, and with a straight and
deadly thrust run Bezarier through the body. The
latter staggered, but stood his ground without fall-

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 235

ing. " That is for the hat !" cried Valois, mockingly.
And again he came on. Two quick feints, two
nimble parries, and once more Valois pierced his
enemy. '* For the feather, fair sir !" he said. No
reply. Mute and grim, deadly pale, and bleeding
profusely, Bezarier fought on. The tenacity of the
man was wonderful. There were no signs of yielding
about him, and it was evident that he would sur-
render only with his life. Another minute, and
Valois for the third time in succession broke down
his opponent's guard, and, as his sword went through
him, exclaimed exultingly: " And that is for the
loop !" Then Bezarier drew himself together, and
spitting out the blood from his mouth, drew his
dagger, and leapt like a tiger at Valois' throat. Taken
wholly by surprise at the unlooked-for display of
phenomenal vigor, the latter lost his footing, and fell
heavily to the ground. That fall doomed him to
sure death. Bezarier planted his knee upon his
chest, and held him down powerless. Then he
stabbed Valois in throat and breast, and forehead,
again and again — fourteen gaping wounds in all.
Then Bezarier rose, and spurning the body of his
dead enemy with his foot, walked quietly back to the
inn. And, it may be stated, in conclusion, that,
although Bezarier was run through the body three
times, he lived for nearly forty years afterward.

On the third of May, 1808, took place the spec-
tacular duel between M. de Grandpre and M. de
Pigne, in balloons, above Paris. An immense crowd
of people had assembled in a field near the Tuileries.
Each principal was accompanied by one second ; the
weapons were blunderbusses, and the terms were to
fight at will. The ascent took place before noon;

236 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and when at a height of about nine hundred feet,
and within less than eighty yards of each other, De
Pigne opened fire, the masses below sent up a great
shout. But De Pigne missed, while De Grandpre
blazed away. Another shout; and then all was still;
for De Pigne's balloon had collapsed, the basket had
turned over and let its occupants out, and they came
down through the air heads foremost, and were dashed
to pieces upon the same housetop.

Another strange duel was this : Captain Raoul de
Vere and' Colonel Barbier-Dufai, of Paris, during a
quarrel, agreed to settle the matter by getting into
a coach with daggers in their right hands, and with
their left arms tied, and fighting while the carriage
was being driven twice around the Place du Car-
rousel by their seconds. Raoul was killed and
Barbier-Dufai was mortally wounded.

In England, in 1608, Edward Morgan killed John
Egerton, although the latter had in a former duel
spared Morgan's life. In 1580, in France, the Vis-
count Turenne was challenged by two brothers,
named Duras and Rosan, whom he fought. The
latter, however, took many advantages unfairly, and
the Viscount was wounded in twenty-two places, but
lived. During the early part of the seventeenth cen-
tury two English physicians named Bennett and
Williams fought in Hyde Park with swords and pis-
tols. They first exchanged shots, in which both were
hit, and then fell to with their swords. Bennett, at
last, fell, mortally wounded, but cried out : " Merci-
ful God Almighty ! give me a little more strength !"
at the same time giving his antagonist a cut that
brought him down also; in this condition they fought
for nearly fifteen minutes, then both expired.

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

Of all the duels which have been fought in defer-
ence to the modern principle of honor, none that we
have ever read of is more affecting or more sangui-
nary and deadly than that between his Grace the
Duke of B. and Lord B.; a manuscript description of
which was found in the library of Mr. Goodwin,
author of the life of Henry VIII. — during whose reign
the affair is supposed to have happened. The cause
of the duel was an affront given the former by the
latter at a ball, out of which an agreement was made
to fight in Hyde Park at half-past five in the morning
of the second day following. The description of the
affair is as follows:

His Grace stripped off his coat, which was scarlet,
trimmed with broad ^pld lace, when my Lord B.'s second
stepped in to unbutton his waistcoat , on which, with some
indignation, his Grace replied : " Do you take me to be a
person of so little honor as to defend myself by such base
means as hiding a shield under my doublet ?" Lieutenant
De Lee desired his excuse, adding, he was bound in honor
to see justice done to the cause he had espoused. The
same ceremony passed upon his Lordship, who had already
pulled off his coat, which was crimson, with broad silver
lace; and both the combatants being ready, my Lord B.
added : " Now, if it please your Grace, come on ;" when they
instantly both stepped into the circle. His Grace fired and
missed ; but my Lord B. perhaps from more experience,
knew that battles were seldom won by hasty measures, de-
liberately levelled his, and wounded his antagonist near the
throat. They both discharged again, when his Lordship
received a slight wound in his turn. On which, they
instantly drew their swords, and impetuously charged each
other; rather each of them meditating the death of his
adversary than his own safety. In the first or second
thrust Lord B. entangled the toe of his pump in a tuft of
grass, and, in evading a push from his antagonist, fell on his

238 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

right side, but supporting himself on his sword hand, by
inconceivable dexterity, sprung backwards and evaded the
push, apparently aimed at his heart. A little pause inter-
vening here, his Grace's second proposed to his Lordship a
reconciliation; but the ardent thirst after each other's blood
so overpowered the strongest arguments of reason, that they
insisted to execute each other's will, whatever might be the
consequences. Nay, the anger of his Grace was raised to
such a pitch of revenge, that he, in that critical moment,
swore if, for the future, either of the seconds inter-
posed, he would make his way through his body. Thus,
after finding all remonstrances of saving them without
effect, they retired to their limited distance, and perhaps
one of the most extraordinary duels ensued that the records
of history can produce, fairly disputed, hand to hand. The
parrying after this interval brought on a close lock, which,
Monsieur des Barreaux says, nothing but the key of the
body can open. In this position they stood for, I dare say,
a minute, striving to disengage each other by successive
wrenches, in one of which his Grace's sword-point got en-
tangled in the guard of his Lordship's, which, in fact, his
Lordship overlooked, so that this disadvantage was recov-
ered by his Grace before the consequence which it might
have brought on was executed. At last, in a very strong
wrench on both sides, their swords sprung from their hands;
I dare say his Lordship's flew six or seven yards upright.
This accident, however, did not retard the affair a moment,
but both seizing their thistles at the same time, the duel
was renewed with as much malevolence as ever. By this
time his Lordship had received a thrust through the inner
part of his sword arm, passing right forward to the exterior
part of the elbow ; his, at the same time, passing a little
over that of his antagonist; but alertly drawing back, I
think, partly before his Grace had recovered his push, run
him through the body a little above the right pass. His
Lordship's sword being thus engaged, nothing was left for
his defence but a naked left arm ; and his Grace being in
this dangerous situation, yet had fair play at almost any part

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 239

of his Lordship's body, who bravely put by several thrusts
exactly levelled at his throat, till, at last, having two fingers
cut off in defending the pushes, and the rest mangled to a
terrible degree, his Grace lodged his sword one rib below his
heart, and in this effecting condition they both stood, with-
out either being able to make another push, and each of
them by this time was in a manner covered with blood and
gore, when both the seconds stepped in, and begged they
would consider their situation, and the good of their
future state ; yet neither world consent to part, till, by the
greater loss of blood which his Lordship sustained, he fell
down senseless, but in such a position that he drew his
sword out of his Grace's body ; but recovering himself a
little before he was quite down, faltered forward, and falling
with his thigh across his sword, snapped it in the middle.
His Grace, observing that he was no longer capable of
defence, or sensible of danger, immediately broke his own,
and fell on his body, with the deepest signs of concern, and
both expired before any assistance could be got, though Dr.
Fountaine had orders not to be out of the way that morn-
ing. Thus fell these two gallant men, whose personal
bravery history can scarcely equal, and whose honor
nothing but such a cause could stain.

In 1852, near Windsor (England), M. Barthelmy
and M. Courtney, two notorious French duellists,
met with pistols, at forty paces — to advance ten paces
before firing, and then fire twice, and conclude with
swords. Courtney fired first and missed (for the first
time in nearly a score of duels), when Barthelmy pro-
posed to surrender his right to fire if Courtney would
agree to proceed with swords. Courtney declined,
however, and Barthelmy presented his weapon,
which snapped. He then recapped, and presented
again; and again the pistol snapped. It was then
agreed that Barthelmy should use Courtney's pistol,
which he did with fatal effect. Upon the return of

240 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the weapons to the shop where they were hired, it
was found that the " charge" in the " loaded " one
consisted of a linen rag, which too plainly and too
atrociously explained why Barthelmy's pistol twice
snapped.

On the 7th of June, 1769, M. Chelais, a Member of
Parliament in France, was challenged by Captain
Beguin, an ex-army officer, who covered himself with
an armor which broke the sword of his antagonist,
whom he stabbed to death, and was afterward ar-
rested, tried, and convicted, and sentenced to be
broken upon the wheel.

During the reign of Henry II., Chateauneuf, a
young Parisian duellist of nineteen, challenged his
guardian, M. Lachesnaye, an old man of eighty, and
literally hacked the octogenarian to pieces; while
protecting his own person, it was afterward dis-
covered, with a neatly-fitting cuirass. At or about
the same time a youth named St. Andre and an old
gentleman called Matas fought with swords near
Paris, and the former was disarmed but given his
life by his humane antagonist; who, while turning
toward his horse, was stabbed to death by the infuri-
ated youth. During the reign of Louis XIII. two
men of Marseilles agreed to fight each other in a tub
with daggers, and both were stabbed to death.
Charles Armstrong, of England, after killing his
antagonist, was assassinated by the second of the
latter. William Harrington, a younger brother of
Sir Jonah Harrington, during his duel with Lieu-
tenant McKenzie, in 1777, was shot dead by
Captain Gillespie, McKenzie's second. M. Aubarrye,
in one of his duels, after being disarmed, stabbed
his antagonist with a dagger. Armand Carrel,

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 241

after having made a written apology to Emile de
Girardin, was slain by the latter in the woods near
Paris in 1836. The Prince of Clarence and his two
seconds were assassinated by the Duke of Biron
and his seconds near Paris, in the sixteenth cen-
tury. The killing of M. Dulong by Marshal
Bugueaud, near Paris, in 1834, was clearly a case of
murder. John Felton (a notorious villain), when he
challenged the Duke of Buckingham, cut off one of
his fingers and sent it with his challenge. It was
proven that Major Oneby, who fought William
Gower, in Hyde Park, in 1725, committed murder;
he was sentenced to be hung, but cheated the
executioner by taking his own life.

242 THE FIELD OF HOHOR.

CHAPTER XIII.
EUROPEAN DUELS— CONCLUDED.

Old-Time Encounters between Highland Cavaliers — The Unfor-
tunate Duel between Lieutenants Riddell and Cunningham —
Many Meetings in Europe; also of Europeans in India, Canada,
Mexico, the Barbadoes, and at the Cape of Good Hope — Lord
Lauderdale and Benedict Arnold — A Number of Judicial Duels —
On Account of a Gambling Debt — Challenged for Disrespect-
ful Utterances of the Queen — Lord Maiden and the Duke of
Norfolk — On the Beach at Sandymount — Sir Philip Francis
and Warren Hastings — Fatal Duels in many Lands — The Duke
of Martina and Count of Conversano — An Affair of Honor be-
tween Gentlemen seated in Chairs — A Number of Desperate
Combats — Some Furious Encounters — A Duel on Account of a
Dispute at College Fifteen Years Before — Miscellaneous En-
gagements down to March, 1884.

IN 1653, on the arrival of General Middleton, to
take chief command of the forces which had been
raised in the Highlands of Scotland for the king's
service, the Earl of Glencairn, who had previously
been their general, invited Middleton, with all his
suite, to dine with him. Glencairn's quarters was at
the Laird of Kettle's house, four miles south from
Dornoch. The following account of a remarkable
quarrel which occurred after dinner is from a manu-
script, written by John Graham, of Deuchrie, who
was eye- and ear-witness to all that passed, from first
to last:

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS, 243

The grace said and the cloth withdrawn, his lordship
called for a glass of wine, and then addressed the general in
these words: "My lord general, you see what a gallant
army these worthy gentlemen here present, whom I have
gathered together, at a time when it could hardly be ex-
pected that any number durst meet together ; these men
have come out to serve his majesty, at the hazard of their
lives, and of all that is dear to them ; I hope, therefore, you
will give them all the encouragement to do their duty that
lies in your power." On this, up started Sir George Monro
from his seat, and said to Lord Glencairn, " My lord, the
men you speak of are nothing but a number of thieves and
robbers, and ere long I will bring another sort of men to the
field." On which Glengarie started up, thinking himself
most concerned ; but Lord Glencairn desired him to forbear,
saying, " Glengarie, I am more concerned in this affront than
you are ;" then addressing himself to Munro, said, " You,
sir, are a base liar ; for they are neither thieves nor robbers,
but gallant gentlemen, and good soldiers." General Middle-
ton desired them both to keep the king's peace, saying, " My
lord, and you, Sir George, this is not the way to do the
king service ; you must not fall out among yourselves ;
therefore, I will have you both to be friends ;" and immedi-
ately calling for a glass of wine, said, " My Lord Glencairn, I
think you did the greatest wrong in giving Sir George the
lie ; you shall drink to him, and he will pledge you." The
noble and good Lord Glencairn accordingly took the glass,
as ordered by the general, and drank to Sir George, who, in
his old surly humor, muttered some words which were not
heard, but did not pledge his lordship. The general gave
orders to sound to horse ; and Lord Glencairn went out in
order to accompany him to the headquarters ; but the gen-
eral would not allow him to go above a mile of the way. His
lordship then returned back, having none in his company
but Colonel Blackader, and John Graham, of Deuchrie.
When arrived, he became exceeding merry, causing the
laird's daughter to play on the virginals, and all the servants
about the house to dance. Supper being now ready, and on

244 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the table, as my lord was going to sit down one of the ser-
vants told him that Alexander Monro, Sir George's brother,
was at the door. My lord immediately commanded to let
him in, and met him at the hall door, where he saluted him,
and made him very welcome, saying, "You see, sir, the meat
is on the table, and will spoil if we sit not down to it." He
placed Monro at the head of the table, next the laird's
daughter. All present were very merry. My lord told
Monro he would give him a spring if he would dance ; which
accordingly he did with the rest, the laird's daughter play-
ing. While the rest were merry, his lordship and Monro
slipped aside ; they did not speak a dozen words together, as
all thought, and after drinking a little longer, Monro de-
parted. My lord then called for a candle, and went to bed.
There were two beds in his room, in one of which he lay,
and in the other lay Blackader and Deuchrie. The whole
family in a little time went to bed. None knew of his lord-
ship's design but one John White, who was his trumpeter
and valet-de-chambre. The night being very short, and my
lord being to meet Monro half-way between his quarters and
Dornoch, their meeting was to be as soon as they could per-
ceive daylight : so that his lordship got not two hours' rest
before he rose ; and, notwithstanding the two aforesaid gen-
tlemen lay in the room with him, he went out and returned
from the encounter without the knowledge of any one in the
house except John White, his servant, who accompanied
him. Monro came, accompanied by his brother. They were
both well mounted : each of the parties was to use one pis-
tol ; after the discharging of which they were to decide the
quarrel with broadswords. Their pistols were fired without
doing any execution, and they made up to each other with
their broadswords drawn. After a few passes his lordship
had the good fortune to give Sir George a sore stroke on
the bridle hand ; whereupon Sir George cried out to his
lordship that he was not able to command his horse, and he
hoped he would allow him to fight on foot. My lord re-
plied, " You base carle ! I will show you that I will match
you either on foot or on horseback." They then both quitted

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 24$

their horses and furiously attacked each other on foot. At
the very first bout, the noble earl gave him so sore a stroke
on the brows, about an inch above his eyes, that he could
not see for the blood that issued from the wound. His lord-
ship was just going to thrust him through the body ; but his
man, John White, forced up his sword, saying, " You have
enough of him, my lord, you have got the better of him."
His lordship was very angry with John, and in a great pas-
sion gave him a blow over the shoulder. He then took
horse and came back to his quarters. Monro went straight
away to the headquarters, and his brother had much ado to
get him conveyed there, by reason of the bleeding both of
his hand and head. The general being acquainted with this
meeting, immediately sent Captain Ochtrie Campbell, with a
guard, to secure the Earl of Glencairn in his quarters, which
accordingly was done before six in the morning. The gen-
eral had ordered Captain Campbell to take his lordship's
sword from him, and to commit him to arrest in his
chamber, taking his parole. This affair happened on Sunday
morning. In the week ensuing there fell out an accident
which made the breach still wider betwixt his lordship and
Monro. One Captain Livingston, who came over with
Monro, and a gentleman called James Lindsay, who came
over with Lord Napier, had some hot words together. Liv-
ingston alleged Monro was in the right, and Lindsay in-
sisted in the contrary. They challenged each other, and
went out early in the morning to the links of Dornoch,
where, at the very first bout, Lindsay thrust his sword
through Livingston's heart, so that in a short time he ex-
pired. Lindsay was afterward shot to death, notwithstand-
ing Lord Glencairn and many other officers did all they
could to secure the setting aside of the sentence.

In 1783, in England, Lieutenant Riddell, of the
Horse Grenadiers, and Lieutenant Cunningham, of
the Scots Grays, quarrelled at play, and Riddell chal-
lenged Cunningham, who declined to meet him; but
many of the officers often recurring to the circum-

246 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

stance, Mr. Cunningham found it necessary, for the
full restoration of his honor, to call Mr. Riddell out.
This appeal Mr. Riddell considered as out of season,
and declined yielding to it until he had consulted his
brother officers, who agreed that there was no obliga-
tion on him to answer Mr. Cunningham. On learning
this determination, Mr. Cunningham, with the view
of forcing Mr. Riddell to fight, publicly insulted him.
The latter observed that as this was a fresh affront it
should not pass unnoticed. He then returned home,
and proceeded to make some necessary arrangements,
when he received a note from Mr. Cunningham, re-
minding him of the affront which he had passed
upon him, and declaring his readiness to give him
satisfaction. This note coming, while the wafer was
yet wet, to the hands of Sir James Riddell, who was
under some apprehension of his son's situation,
opened it, and having read it, closed it, without tak-
ing any other notice of its contents than providing
the assistance of the most eminent surgeons. The
parties met, and eight paces were measured, at which
distance they took their ground. They tossed up for
the first fire, which Mr. Riddell won. He fired, and
shot Mr. Cunningham under the right breast; he
reeled back, but did not fall. Mr. Riddell still kept
his ground. Mr. Cunningham, after a pause of a few
minutes, declared he would not be taken off the field
till he had fired at his adversary. He then presented
his pistol, and Mr. Riddell was mortally wounded.
He died in the course of the evening, a victim, not to
the passion, but to the custom of duelling.

On the i8th of July, 1791, at Paris, political ani-
mosities sent the Duke de Castries and Monsieur
Lameth into the field, and the latter was danger-

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 247

ously wounded. On the iQth of July, same year,
Messrs. Graham and Julius, attorneys, dined to-
gether and quarrelled during a discussion about re-
ligion, and settled their differences the next morning
upon Blackheath (England) with pistols; Graham
(who was an eminent special pleader) being mortally
wounded at the first fire. Julius was the challenged
party, his second being Mr. Maxwell; while Mr. Ellis
acted as second for Mr. Graham. On the ist of
March, 1792, Messrs. Aikin and Kemble, of Drury
Lane Theatre, fought near London, the former firing
without effect and the latter declining to discharge
his weapon. They had no seconds, but Mr. Bannis-
ter, a mutual friend, accompanied them, and effected
a reconciliation after the first fire.

On the 2d of July, 1792, a hostile meeting took
place between Lord Lauderdale and General Bene-
dict Arnold (the latter the notorious American
traitor), near Kilburn Wells (England). Arnold
fired without effect, and Lauderdale withheld his fire.
He said: "I did not come here to fire at the General,
nor can I retract any of the offensive expressions. If
General Arnold is not satisfied he may fire until
he is;" after which, Messrs. Fox and Hawke, the
seconds, succeeded in terminating the affair. A day
or two before a similar meeting had taken place be-
tween the Earl and the Duke of Richmond. On the
8th of November, 1792, M. Charles Lameth, who had
been dangerously wounded in a duel about sixteen
months before, by the Duke de Castries, met M. de
Chauvigny upon the grounds near the residence of
M. Lameth, near Paris, and was again wounded.
The weapons used were swords, and the seconds
were the Duke de Pierine and Count de Chabane for

248 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Chauvigny, and Mr. Maselet and the Duke d'Aiguil-
lon for Monsieur Lameth. In 1827, at Dublin, be-
tween Mr. Brie and Mr. Hayes, in which the former
was killed; weapons, pistols.

In 878 a judicial duel was fought in France be-
tween Ingelgerius and Gontran, with swords, and the
latter was killed. The victor was only sixteen years
old. After killing Gontran, Ingelgerius cut off his
head and presented it to Louis the Second. Another
memorable French judicial duel was that between
Troussel and Du Gueschin, in which the latter was
victorious. During the reign of Charles the Sixth a
judicial duel was fought between Sieur Carrouges
and Sieur Leguis, in which the latter was defeated
and then hanged. In 1509, in Paris, between L'Isle
Marivant and Marolles — the former killed. During
the reign of Louis the Thirteenth, between the Mar-
quis de Themines and the Marquis de Richelieu (a
brother of the great Cardinal), in which de Richelieu
was killed. Also between Marquis de Valencay and
Marquis de Cavois — the latter killed.

On the 3oth of October, 1824, at Bull Inn, Edin-
burgh, Captain Gourlay and Mr. Westall quarrelled
over a gambling debt of seventy guineas, when the
latter called the officer a liar and Gourlay struck the
offender with a poker; after which they repaired to a
field near town and fought with pistols, Gourlay be-
ing shot dead at the first fire. On the 2ist of Febru-
ary, 1827, in Paris, two medical students named Gou-
lard and Caire quarrelled over a game of billiards,
and went to the Bois de Boulogne and fought with
pistols, and the former was killed. Caire was ar-
rested upon the following day, tried and convicted of
murder, and branded and sentenced to hard labor for

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 249

life. On the 8th of June, 1830, in England, Richard
William Lambrecht and Oliver Clayton fought with
pistols, and the latter was killed. At Boulogne,
April i, 1829, Captain Helsham and Lieutenant
Crowther of the British army met with pistols at ten
paces, and the latter was killed.

On the i5th of July, 1842, between Hon. Craven
Berkeley, M.P., and Captain Boldero, M.P., near
Osterly Park, with pistols. The latter was charged
with utterances disrespectful of the Queen by Berke-
ley. The two gentlemen were attended by Hons. W.
Ridley Colbourne and W. F. Mackenzie, Members of
Parliament, who terminated the meeting after a
harmless exchange of shots. On the iyth of Decem-
ber, 1842, between J. P. Stanfield and Sir R. Carding-
ton, near London, with pistols, at twelve paces. The
latter was wounded in the arm, while his own bullet
passed through the collar of Stanfield's coat. On the
loth of December, 1839, between Lord George Loftus
and Lord Harley, at Boulogne; the parties ex-
changed one shot, without injury to either. On the
i3th of June, 1839, between Lord Londonderry and
H. Grattan, on Wimbledom Common; Grattan fired
and missed, and his lordship discharged his pistol in
the air. In 1809, near London, between Captain
Cadogan and Lord Paget, who fired once at each
other without either sustaining injury.

On the 3oth of April, 1796, in England, the Duke
of Norfolk and Lord Maiden met in a field beyond
Paddington and fired once without effect, when a
reconciliation was effected by their seconds — Cap-
tains Taylor and Wombwell. On June 19, 1794, Mr.
Rowlls, a brewer, was killed by Richard England in
a duel at Cranford Bridge. The affair grew out of a

250 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

disturbance between the two gentlemen at Ascot
races a few days before. On the ipth of July, 1796,
England was found guilty of manslaughter, and was
sentenced to pay a fine of one shilling and to be im-
prisoned in Newgate for twelve months. In Paris, in
1819, between Theophilus Walsh and Edward Pellew,
(officers of the British army), with pistols; Pellew
killed. In 1819, in Ireland, between Charles Phillips
and Mr. Henriquez; two shots and neither hurt. In
1685, in England, Robert Radcliffe was killed. In
1829, in England, Captain Plowden. In the province
of New Brunswick, in 1821, George F. Street and
George L. Wetmore; they fought with pistols, at fif-
teen paces, and Wetmore was mortally wounded at
the second shot, the first shot from his antagonist's
pistol taking effect in Wetmore's arm. The survivor
and his second (Lieutenant R. Davis, of the Seventy-
fourth British Foot) were tried for murder and ac-
quitted.

On February 12, 1814, on the beach at Sandy-
mount, near Dublin, Counsellors Hatchell and Mor-
ley. The latter fired first and missed, and was then
shot dead by his adversary. In May, 1812, two
French officers on parole in Reading (England), be-
ing unable to get a case of pistols, agreed to fight
with a single fowling-piece, first one to take a shot
and then the other, at fifty paces. The first shot,
however, took effect. On October 7, 1812, Lieuten-
ants Bagnall and Stuart, of the Royal Marines,
fought with pistols, near Portsmouth, and Bagnall
fell mortally wounded at the second fire. On
September 6, 1810, on Wimbledom Common, George
Payne and Mr. Clark; they fought with pistols, and
Payne was mortally wounded at the first fire. On

NO TED E UROPEAtf D UELS. 2 5 1

March 4, 1811, at Barbadoes, Captain Boardman, of
the Sixtieth Foot, and Ensign De Betten, of the
Royal West Indies Rangers; at the first fire Board-
man received his antagonist's bullet in the heart and
fell dead. In January, 1812, two men fought at Bor-
deaux, and one of them fell dead at the first fire. It
was discovered, however, upon examination of the
victim, that he had died from either excitement or
fright, as he had not been touched by his adversary's
bullet.

In 1783, in India, Sir Philip Francis and Warren
Hastings, with pistols; the former was dangerously
wounded, but recovered. In India, in 1775, General
Clavering and Mr. Barnwell; they fought with
pistols, and fired once without effect. In 1819, in
Canada, Mr. Caldwell and Mr. O'Sullivan fought
with pistols, and both were badly wounded at the
first fire. In 1720, at or near Hanover, Vice-Admiral
Tordenskiold, of Denmark, and Colonel Stahl, of
Sweden. The latter had swindled a young officer
out of a large sum of money at cards, at which the
Admiral gave Stahl a piece of his mind; who, in
return, called Tordenskiold a rascally sailor. The
latter then drove the Colonel out into the street with
a cane, and afterward snatched from the officer the
sword he had drawn and broke it over his head.
Stahl then challenged the Admiral, who accepted,
and was run through the body and killed.

On the pth of May, 1802, Generals Regnier and
Destaing fought in the Bois de Boulogne with pis-
tols, and the latter was killed at the first fire. Des-
taing had been made a general of division for gallant
behavior at the Battle of the Pyramids; and at the
Battle of Aboukir he repulsed the first line of the

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Turks and drove the latter into the sea. He was the
challenging party, but the French Government pen-
sioned his widow. At Rathgar, near Dublin, on the
8th of June, 1802, Sir Richard Musgrave was shot in
the thigh by William Todd Jones, the latter having
been the challenged party. At the Cape of Good
Hope, on the i4th of March, 1802, Lieutenant Rae
and Purser Bremen, of his Majesty's ship Hindostan,
fought with pistols in the East India Company's gar-
dens, and Bremen was killed at the third fire. Saw-
yer, a captain's clerk of the British war-vessel,
Inflexible, fought with a marine near Deal (Ireland),
on the pth of October, 1804, and was killed at the
first shot. On the 4th of January, 1806, near Liver-
pool, Colonel Brookes and Major Bolton; the latter
killed at the first fire. On the 22d of March, 1860,
on Galleywood Common, near Chelmsford (England)
Lieutenant Turrens and Surgeon Fisher, both of the
Sixth Regiment Foot, with pistols ; the former mor-
tally wounded at the first fire. The coroner's jury
returned a verdict of wilful murder against Fisher,
and he absconded.

In 1784, in England, Count Alfieri and Lord Lig-
onier, in which the latter was wounded ; weapons,
swords. In 1664, in Naples, the Duke of Martina
and the Count of Conversano, with swords. Pre-
vious to the duel the Duke executed a will and made
religious preparations for his death, while the Count
ordered a magnificent dinner to which he invited a
large number of his friends. The Count, however,
was killed. In 1809, in England, Viscount Falkland
and A. Powell, with swords; the former was mortally
wounded. In 1770, in Ireland, Sir Edward Crofton
and George French, with pistols ; the latter was

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 253

killed. In 1825, in France, Count Segur and Baron
de Gourgaud, with swords; the former was wounded.
In 1809, in England, Lieutenant Sparling and Cap-
tain Grayson, with pistols ; the latter was killed and
the former was tried for the offence and acquitted.

On the 22d of August, 1838, on Wimbledom Com-
mon, Francis Lionel Elliott and John Flower Mirfin,
in which the latter was killed at the first shot; Elliott
then made his escape ; but the two seconds (John
Young and Henry Webber) were arrested and con-
victed of manslaughter and sent to Guilford jail for
one year. On the 26th of July, 1882, M. Pinac was
killed in a duel at Begnires by an Englishman, who
had been challenged for writing on the margin of a
pamphlet that " Everything concerning the battle of
Toulouse within is false. Wellington gained a com-
plete victory, and the French army is indebted to the
generosity of Wellington that it was not put to the
sword." On the 6th of January, 1882, M. Benjamin
Constant and M. Forbin des Issarts, near Paris,
seated in chairs, at ten paces, on account of the rheu-
matism of the former. They fired two shots at each
other, when the seconds terminated the affair.

On the igih of February, 1797, in Phoenix Park,
Dublin, Lord Blaney and the Duke de Fitz James, in
which the latter was shot in the side. Also in Dub-
lin, on the i2th of December, 1797, between Colonel
Fitzgerald and the Earl of Kingston, in which both
were slightly wounded. A son of the latter then met
Fitzgerald, and after firing once they grappled with
each other ; and, just as Fitzgerald was in the act of
killing young Kingston, the Earl rushed in upon the
combatants and shot Fitzgerald through the heart,
thereby saving his son's life. The Colonel died

254 T£fE FIELD OF HONOR.

lamented by none, as he had betrayed a daughter of
the Earl. Early in 1802 Lieutenant Bailey and Mr.
Forbes fought with pistols at Bombay, and the latter
was killed at the first fire. Bailey and his second
were sent to Botany Bay — the former for fourteen
and the latter for seven years. On the 6th of Octo-
ber, 1802, at Quebec, Major Impey and Lieutenant
Willis, of the Sixth (British) Foot, quarrelled in the
mess-room and fought the next day with pistols,
Impey falling mortally wounded at the first fire. On
March i, 1802, at Paris, in the wood of Boulogne,
Captain Knoring, a Livonian, was killed at the
fourth fire by a Hanoverian gentleman named
Brusch. The cause of the duel was a dispute at
college fifteen years before.

In July, 1775, at the Cape of Good Hope, Captains
Ferguson and Roach, of the East India Company's
Land Service, quarrelled at the dinner-table, and
shortly afterward retired to the street, and fought it
out with swords, Ferguson at last being killed ; but
not until Roach had received several serious cuts in
the head and* sustained a dislocation of the left arm.
The survivor was tried for murder, but was acquit-
ted at the Cape. He was afterward tried for man-
slaughter in England, and was again acquitted. In
1618, in England, Edward Percy and Philip Consta-
ble met with swords, and after a furious contest the
latter was killed. On the 2d of February, 1773, the
Earl of Bellamont and Lord Townshend fought at
Marylebone Fields, near London. They went to the
grounds armed with swords and pistols, but upon
their arrival it was decided by their seconds (Hon.
Mr. Dille for Bellamont and Lord Ligonier for
Townshend) that they should fight with the latter

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS. 255

weapons, and the Earl was dangerously wounded at
the first fire. He was in such great agony from the
wound, which was in the belly, that he could not ride
in his chaise, and was carried to his residence in a
chair.

In Ireland, in 1772, Captain Benjamin Barne and
Charles Mathews fought with pistols, and Barne was
killed at the first fire. In 1849, near Paris, Monsieur
Lacombe and Monsieur Charles Blanc fought with
swords, and the former was wounded in the arm. In
1822, in Scotland, James Stuart and Sir Alexander
Boswell fought with pistols, and Boswell was killed.
The survivor was tried for murder, but was acquit-
ted. It was shown at the trial that Stuart's friends
made all reasonable efforts to adjust the difficulty,
but that the attitude of Boswell made the meeting
unavoidable. The second of Mr. Boswell testified
that the Earl spurned all overtures tending toward
reconciliation or adjustment.

On the 1 7th of January, 1821, at Calais, between
Lieutenant-Colonel Burgos Cumac, of the First
(British) Life Guards, and Richard Gough ; the
parties fired once without effect, and at the second
shot Cumac was hit in the leg. On the i3th of Feb-
ruary, 1832, on Wimbledom Common, between
Major-General Lorenzo Moore and Miles Stapylton
— the latter wounded at the first fire. On the 8th of
April, 1826, on Wormwood Scrubs, with pistols, Cap-
tain Dickson and Colonel Evans (both of the British
army) ; the latter wounded. At Simla (India), in
January, 1837, between Lieutenant Frazer, of the
Seventh (British) Cavalry, and Lieutenant Rose, of
the Eleventh Dragoons — the latter wounded in the
thigh. Also, in England : On September 18, 1820,

256 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Mr. Henshaw and Mr. Hartinger — both desperately
wounded ; on February 12, 1814, Mr. Hatchel and
Mr. Morley — the latter slightly wounded ; October
7, 1812, Lieutenants Stewart and Bagnal — the lat-
ter mortally wounded ; February 7, 1815, Colonel
Quentin and Colonel Palmer — no fatality ; Novem-
ber 19, 1835, Mr. Roebuck, M.P., and Mr. Black,
editor of the London Morning Chronicle — two shots
each and neither hurt ; January 22, 1833, Mr. Storey
and Mr. Mathias — the latter wounded ; on the same
day Mr. Maher and Mr. Colles — neither hurt ; in
December, 1817, Captain Fottrell and Colonel Ross
— five shots each, but no fatality ; in August, 1827,
Rev. Mr. Hodson and Mr. Grady — the latter severely
wounded ; May 29, 1835, Sir Colquhoun Grant and
Lord Seymour — no fatality ; May 26, 1836, Mr. Ruth-
ven fought two duels, one with Mr. Scott and one
with Mr. Close, wounding the latter. On March 9,
1884, at Antwerp, General David (Commander of the
Civic Guards) and Mr. Williams (a broker), with
swords — the latter badly wounded. In Paris, De-
cember 1 8, 1883, between Octave Mirabeau and Paul
Bonnetain (on account of Marie Colombier's book on
Sarah Bernhardt), with swords ; Bonnetain wounded
twice. At Lisbon, on March 12, 1884, between Vis-
count Roberdo and Major Serpa Pinto, with swords
— the former wounded in five places. On the 3d of
March, 1884, near Matamoras (Mexico), Major Lopez
Martablo was killed at the first shot by the editor of
the Matamoras Cronista.

On the i4th of February, 1884, a duel took place in
Paris between M. Laguerre and M. Chauriance,
(members of the French Chamber of Deputies,) with
pistols, and the former was wounded in the knee.

NOTED EUROPEAN DUELS.

On the 2oth of April, 1884, a duel with swords was
fought in the Bois de Boulogne between Joseph
Casey, a Fenian, and Captain Scully, an Irish-Ameri-
can. Scully had been suspected of being an in-
former. The duel resulted in Scully being slightly
wounded in the neck. His sword was also broken.
On the 8th of May, 1884, near the city of Mexico,
between Sefior Torres (formerly Governor of Sonora)
and Sefior Garza, with pistols — Torres wounded in
the right hand.

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XIV.
NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

The First Fatal Meeting in the United States— A Number of
Early Affairs— Gwinnett and Mclntosh — Generals Howe and
Gadsden — Lee and Laurens — Con way and Cadwallader — De
Witt Clinton and Swartwout — Gardenier and Campbell — Finch
and White, and many others — What English Rudeness to Amer-
ican Officers Cost — Affairs of British Officers in America —
Philip Hamilton's Fatal Duel — A Savage Encounter at Blad-
ensburg between Mason and McCarty— A Number of Despe-
rate Affairs— Prue and Throuet— Philadelphia Physicians Kill
Each Other — Dromgoole and Dugger of North Carolina — Stuart
and Dade of Virginia — Jones and Anderson of Tennessee —
Allston and Reed and Jones and Gronard of Florida — Gist and
Fair of Georgia — Lanusse and Marigny of Louisiana — Huger
and Rutledge of South Carolina — The First Duel in Kentucky —
How Two Prominent Americans Took their Positions with
Rifles at Sixty Yards on Account of a Quarrel over Twelve and
a Half Cents — Sullivan's Sentiments — Comical Termination of
a Seriously Commenced Affair — No Bloodshed but Plenty of
Whiskey— "All's Well that Ends Well "—Two Old New York
Duels — The Maryland Duelling Family of Wrights — Shooting a
Bunch of Keys out of a Man's Pocket.

THE first fatal duel in (what is now) the United
States was fought on the Common, in Boston (Massa-
chusetts), between Benjamin Woodbridge and Henry
Phillips, on the evening of July 3, 1728. These young
gentlemen had quarrelled over cards at the Royal
Exchange Tavern, in King Street (now State Street),

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 259

Boston; and, under the influence of strong drink, had
agreed to settle their differences with their swords in
the public grounds above named. They met at a
little after eight in the evening, and Woodbridge was
mortally wounded, and was found dead on the Com-
mon upon the following morning. Both were gentle-
men of good social position. Phillips was a brother
of Gillam Phillips, who had married Marie, the sister
of Peter Faneuil, the builder of Boston's famous
hall. The visitor at the metropolis of New England
while passing along Tremont Street may stop at the
old Granary Burying Ground, between the Tremont
House and Park Street Church, and read upon a
plain slate stone the following:

Here Lyes Interred The Body of Mr. Benjamin Wood-
bridge, Son of the Honourable Dudley Woodbridge, Esq.,
Who Dec'd July ye 3d, 1728, In ye 2oth Year of His Age.

In other words, that simple slate slab, with its un-
ostentatious inscription, marks the mound under
which were deposited the remains of the first victim
of the code duello in the English-speaking portion of
America. Requiescat in pace.

In 1777 Hon. Button Gwinnett, M. C. from Geor-
gia (a signer of the Declaration of Independence), and
Lackland Mclntosh, an officer in the army of the
Revolution, fought with pistols, near Savannah
(Georgia), and both were wounded — Gwinnett mor-
tally. On the i3th of August, 1778, Generals Howe
and Gadsden fought a duel with pistols, in Georgia,
in which the latter was slightly wounded. During
the same year Major-General Charles Lee and Colo-
nel John Laurens, aide-de-camp to Washington,
fought with pistols, near Philadelphia, and Lee was

260 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

wounded. It was in 1778, also, that General Cadwal-
lader fought and dangerously wounded General Con-
way — both of the Revolutionary Army. The same
year Pierre Landais and William Cottineau, Captains
in the United States Navy, fought with small swords,
in Holland, and the latter was severely wounded. In
1819 Midshipmen Cannon and Pierson, of the United
States Navy, met with pistols, near Havana, and the
former was killed at the first fire. In 1814 Edward
Hopkins, an ensign of infantry, was killed at Bladens-
burg. Hopkins was a native of Maryland, and was
slain within sight of his own home.

Samuel C. Bloomfield, an officer of the army, was
killed near Weehawken (New Jersey), in 1814.

William K. Blue, of Virginia, a captain of infantry,
was killed in a duel, in 1802, at Fort Washington
(Ohio).

In 1786, in South Carolina, Mr. Ladd, a distin-
guished surgeon, was killed by Mr. Isaacs.

Lieutenant James J. Bowie, U. S. A., was killed in
a duel near Lake Pontchartrain, in 1809.

In 1808 Henry Clay and Humphrey Marshall —
both members of the legislature of Kentucky at the
time — met near Lexington, with pistols, and both
were touched at the second fire.

In 1802 Barent Gardenier, M. C. from the Ulster
district of New York, was drawn into a duel with
George Washington Campbell, M. C. from Tennessee
(afterward Minister to Russia), and the two gentle-
men met at Bladensburg, and Garde-nier was danger-
ously (it was thought at the time mortally) wounded.
Gardenier was a favorite with the Federalists of New
York, who re-elected him after his recovery. He
edited a New York newspaper a number of years, and

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 26 1

died at Kingston in 1822. His daughter became the
wife of Theodore Fay, a prominent journalist. While
Campbell was Minister to Russia a daughter was
born to him, whom he named Leczinska, and who be-
came the wife of General Ewell, a distinguished offi-
cer of the Confederate Army.

In 1803, apparently a combative year, in Virginia,
Wyndam Grymes challenged Mr. Terrell; and, in the
duel (with pistols) which followed, Mr. Grymes was
killed at the second fire. In 1803, in Georgia, Samuel
Howard was dangerously wounded by Joseph Welcher
at the first fire. In 1803, in Virginia, James Hughes
was killed by James Tucker, who was seriously
wounded. Paymaster James, U. S. A., was killed
near Savannah, in 1815. In 1819 Lieutenant Francis
B. White, of the United States Marine Corps, and
Lieutentant William B. Finch, of the Navy, after quite
a correspondence, met on an island in Boston harbor,
with pistols, and White, who was the challenger, was
instantly killed at the first fire. In 1803, in the Medi-
terranean, Lieutenant Osborn, of the United States
Marine Corps, and Lieutenant Vandyke, of the United
States Navy, fought with pistols, and both were se-
verely wounded at the first fire. In 1786 Colonel
Maurice Simons, who had given offence to Major Wil-
liam Clay Snipes by the character of his testimony in
a court of justice, was challenged by the latter and
killed. Snipes was afterward arrested and tried on a
charge of murder, but was convicted of manslaugh-
ter. In 1794 Lieutenant Huston and Ensign Brad-
shaw fought in Pennsylvania, near Lake Erie, and
both were killed. In 1803 Dr. James Wyer was killed
by Surgeon Sargent at Natchez (Mississippi). Also
in Mississippi, in 1812, Captain John Stewart, U. S. A.,

262 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

by Henry Mason, at the first fire. In 1810, in Missis-
sippi, Lieutenant Stephen Rose, U. S. A., was killed.
In 1809, near Carlisle (Pennsylvania), Cornet Huxton
Milton, U. S. A., was mortally wounded. In 1814, near
New York, Captain Macomb, U. S. A., was killed by a
brother officer at the first fire. In 1802, at Leghorn
(Italy), Captain James McKnight, of the United
States Marine Corps, and Lieutenant Lawson, of the
United States Navy, fought with pistols, and the for-
mer was killed. In 1803 Lieutenant Buck, while on
duty near Natchez, was challenged by Thomas
Moore, of that city, who was killed at the first shot,
the weapons being rifles, distance twelve paces.

In 1803, at Malta, Midshipman Joseph Bainbridge,
United States Navy, after having been rudely and pur-
posely run against three or four times by one Coch-
ran, the English Secretary at Malta, in the lobby of
the theatre, knocked the offender down, and was
challenged the same night. Bainbridge, who had
never fired at a mark in his life, placed the matter in
the hands of Stephen Decatur — then a lieutenant in
the American Navy — who, having been informed that
Cochran had been practising with a pistol at ten or
twelve paces for weeks, named four paces. Cochran's
second objected, saying that the distance was simply
murderous. Decatur admitted the fact, but declined
to modify his terms, and so the combatants met, and
the aggressive Englishman was killed at the second
fire, while Bainbridge escaped unhurt. A similar af-
fair was the duel at Gibraltar, in 1820, between Lieu-
tenant Downing, of the United States Navy, and
Lieutenant Smith, of the British Army, in which
Smith, who was the challenging party, was killed.

On the loth of October, 1777, in New York, Cap-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 263

tain Pennington, of the Coldstream (Foot) Guards,
was challenged by Captain Tollemache, of the Royal
Navy, for writing a sonnet reflecting upon the wit of
the wife of Captain T. The combatants first used
pistols, without damage to either, and then fell at
each other with swords — Tollemache Toeing killed on
on the spot and Pennington sustaining severe
wounds. In 1783 General Coffin and Colonel Camp-
bell, also officers of the British Army during the
Revolution, fought in New York, and the former was
seriously wounded. In 1781 Colonel Stuart, of the
British Army, and Captain John Smith, of the Ameri-
can Army, met near Guilford (South Carolina) and
fought with sabres; and Smith, after receiving many
wounds, brought his weapon down furiously upon
his adversary's head, cutting it open down to the
spine.

In 1802 Hon. De Witt Clinton and Hon. John
Swartwout, of New York, became involved in the
same political dispute which brought on the duel
between Hamilton and Burr between two and
three years later, and met, with pistols, near the city
of New York, and exchanged five shots — the fourth
and fifth of which took effect upon Mr. Swartwout.
Mr. Clinton then declined to fight further or to make
an apology. In 1879 a correspondent of the Phila-
delphia Times furnished that paper with the following
account of that duel, which was not precisely like any
other meeting ever chronicled:

It is a notable fact, however, that the most determined duel
of which I have any record was fought in New York State
and very near the metropolis of that name. The meeting
was between De Witt Clinton and John Swartwout, in 1802.
It appears probable that if the dispute in which this duel

264 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

originated had taken its natural course the most famous
duel in any history — that between Hamilton and Burr —
would have been omitted. Clinton and Burr had a very
fierce and truculent political dispute, which finally became
personal. Before it had fairly come to an issue John
Swartwout became involved in it, taking Burr's place. He
challenged Clinton, who accepted. On the field Clinton
remarked that he wished he had the principal (Burr)
before him. If his wish had been gratified there is little
doubt that his fatal precision of shot would have put Burr
where he could not have killed Hamilton three years later.
Mr. Swartwout insisted that he should have an apology, and
prepared one that he insisted Mr. Clinton should sign. Mr.
Clinton, of course, declined, and the parties went to the
field. The duel was such a remarkable one that I present
an account given by Mr. N. S. Smith, who was Swartwout's
second. He says : The gentlemen took positions and fired
without effect. At Mr. Riker's request, I asked Mr. Swart-
wout if he was satisfied. He answering in the negative,
the second shot was fired without effect. I again asked Mr.
Swartwout if he was satisfied. He replied, " I am not," and
the third shot was exchanged without injury. I then asked
Mr. Swartwout, " Are you satisfied, sir ?" He replied, " I
am not, neither shall I be until the apology is made which
I have demanded. Until then we must proceed." I then
presented a paper to Mr. Riker for Mr. Clinton's signature,
containing the apology demanded, observing that this paper
must be signed or we would proceed. Mr. Clinton declared
he would sign no paper on the subject, that he had no ani-
mosity to Mr. Swartwout ; and would willingly shake hands
and agree to meet on the score of former friendship. Mr.
Swartwout insisted on the signature to the apology, and Mr.
Clinton declining, they stood at their posts and fired a fourth
shot. Mr. Swartwout was wounded in the left leg, about
five inches below the knee. Being asked if he was satisfied,
Mr. Swartwout replied : " It is useless to repeat the question.
My determination is fixed, and I beg we may proceed." Mr.
Clinton repeated that he had no animosity against Mr.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 26$

Swartwout ; was sorry for what had passed ; proposed to
advance, shake hands, and bury the past in oblivion. Dur-
ing the conversation the surgeon, kneeling at his side,
extracted the ball from Mr. Swartwout's leg. The fifth
shot being fired, Mr. Swartwout received a ball in the left
leg, about five inches above the ankle, still, however, stand-
ing at his post perfectly composed. At the request of Mr.
Riker I asked : "Are you satisfied ?" He forcibly answered :
" No, sir ; I am not. Proceed." Mr. Clinton then quit his
post, declining the combat, and declared that he would fire
no more. Mr. Swartwout expressed himself surprised that
Mr. Clinton would neither apologize nor give the satisfaction
required, and addressing me, said : " What shall I do, my
friend ?" I answered : " Mr. Clinton declines making the
apology required, refuses taking his position, and positively
declares he will fight no more. His second appearing to
acquiesce in the disposition of his principal, there is nothing
further for you to do now but to have your wounds dressed."
The surgeons attending dressed his wounds, and the gentle-
men returned in their respective barges to the city.

One of the most distressing among the early Ameri-
can " affairs of honor" was that in which Philip Hamil-
ton (eldest son of General Alexander Hamilton — who
was killed by Aaron Burr some thirty months later)
lost his life. This young gentleman was only eighteen
years of age; had just graduated from Columbia Col-
lege with high honor, and was a lad of great promise.
He was a favorite with all with whom he came in con-
tact, and to a remarkable degree mirrored the brilliant
talents, elevated ambition, and arrogant temper of his
distinguished parent. On the 4th of July, 1801, Philip
stood and listened to an orator who hurled severe in-
vective at his father. A short time afterward young
Hamilton and a friend occupied a box at a theatre;
and in an adjoining compartment sat G. J. Eaker —

266 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the orator alluded to. Hamilton and his companion
at once let fly furious and incessant shafts of ridicule
of Eaker's Independence Day pyrotechnics, and were
at last summoned to the lobby, where Eaker met
them, and, applying an insulting epithet to Hamilton
and his friend, seized the former by the nape of the
neck and rushed him out into the street. Hamilton's
friend sent Eaker a challenge the following day, a
duel took place and four shots were exchanged with-
out injury to either. This termination of the affair
was so unsatisfactory to Philip Hamilton that he re-
opened the controversy by sending Eaker a challenge,
which was at once accepted. The combatants met on
January 10, 1802, at Weehawken (N. J.), and fought
with pistols at twelve paces — Hamilton receiving his
antagonist's bullet in a vital part, from which he died
after an excessive agony of twenty hours. General
Hamilton, when apprised of the place of meeting,
hurried forward to prevent it, but fainted on the way.
On the 6th of February, 1819, Bladensburg, Md., —
already the locus in quo of belligerent meetings — was
made additionally famous by the desperate encounter,
with muskets, of General Armistead T. Mason and
Colonel John M. McCarty (cousins), both of Virginia.
The two gentlemen had quarrelled at an election, out
of which grew a challenge from McCarty to Mason,
who was a United States Senator from Virginia at the
time. The former, having substantially prescribed
terms and conditions and method of arrangement,
met with refusal, although Mason, in his letter of de-
clension, intimated that he would accept a challenge
written and sent in proper form. McCarty then
" posted" Mason as a coward, and was quickly chal-
lenged by the latter, and declined on the ground that

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 267

the challenger was wanting in courage and did not
"mean business." Here the matter ended for some
time, when General Jackson came upon the scene, and
it was unexpectedly reopened by Mason sending
McCarty a challenge, which the latter declined by
proposing that he would submit to one of three
things, namely: either that they should leap together
from the dome of the Capitol, fight together on a
barrel of powder, or meet in a hand-to-hand encounter
with dirks. It was at last arranged that they should
meet with shotguns, each loaded with a single ball,
at four paces. When they were placed in position
the muzzles of their weapons nearly touched ; and at
the word of command both fired together, and Mason
fell dead and McCarty was seriously wounded. Mason
was a member of that distinguished Virginia family
to which belonged James Mason, the Senator, and
James Y. Mason, the Minister of the Confederate
Government to France, who was taken from an English
ship by Commodore Wilkes during the first year of
the War of the Rebellion.

In New Orleans, many years ago, two Frenchmen
named Pauline Prue and Hippolyte Throuet fought
by being placed back to back, at five paces, with in-
structions to turn at the given word and fire at will.
They both turned at the word ; and, though Prue's
weapon was discharged accidentally, Throuet took
deliberate aim and shot his antagonist through the
heart. A most sanguinary encounter took place in
Philadelphia in June, 1830, between two physicians
named Jeffries and Smith. They had arranged to
meet with pistols, at eight paces ; and, at the first
shot, both missed ; but at the second Smith had his
left arm shattered. The wounded man then de-

268 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

manded another shot, and this time Jeffries received
Smith's bullet in the thigh. At the fourth fire both
fell mortally wounded and died upon the field. When
Jeffries was informed that Smith had expired, he said :
"Well, I am willing to die, too." And he never spoke
afterward. In 1837, in North Carolina, Hon. G. C.
Dromgoole, M. C., and Mr. Dugger fought with pis-
tols, at four paces, and the latter was mortally wounded
at the first fire. In May, 1820, Richard Stuart and
Townsend S. Dade (relatives), of King George County
(Virginia), met with double-barrelled shotguns
loaded with buckshot. Each received the other's fire
— Dade falling dead and Stuart receiving a wound
from which he died upon the following day.

In 1837, in Tennessee, Richard M. Jones and Henry
W. Anderson met in murderous combat with pistols,
at four feet, in which Jones was shot dead ; the bullet
from the weapon of the latter lodging in the muzzle
of Anderson's pistol. In 1823, in Virginia, Colonel
Richard Graves sent a cartel of defiance to Captain
Lacy, and proposed that two cups should be filled —
one with deadly poison and the other with pure water
— and that they should draw lots to determine which
one should drink the poison; and that the one who
should draw the blank should have the choice of cups
and swallow the contents of the one selected ; and that
the other, who must draw the letter P, should be
bound upon his honor to swallow the contents of the
remaining cup. Lacy replied that he would fight
Graves like a gentleman, but declined to drink poison
to accommodate any one. Graves then renewed his
challenge and proposed that they fight with knives,
whereupon he was arrested and afterward tried for
his atrocious conduct, but acquitted.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 269

In 1852, in Florida, Colonel Gronard and Major
Jones met with bowie knives, and after a desperate
encounter in which both were horribly cut, Jones was
killed. In 1839, at Tallahassee (Florida), Major All-
ston challenged General Reed and was killed. Willis
Allston, a brother of the deceased, then killed Reed
and fled the State. On the loth of December, 1841,
near Brazoria (Texas), the latter got into an alterca-
tion with Dr. John Stuart and killed him, at which
a party of vigilantes " took out" Allston and perfo-
rated him with bullets. In 1832, in Georgia, two
young men named Gist and Fair met with pistols,
and the latter was killed. Three of Gist's brothers
were in attendance with pistols and shotguns, pre-
sumably to see fair play. In 1830, at New Orleans,
Mr. Lanusse and Mr. Marigny met with swords and
pistols, and after firing at each other twice, fell to
with their swords, during which both were many times
desperately wounded, Marigny dying while being
conveyed from the field. In 1853, in the same city,
two men named Scott and Travis fought with bowie
knives, and both were desperately wounded, Scott
dying from the effects of his injuries some months
afterward.

Judge Huger, of South Carolina, once challenged
Major Rutledge (his brother-in-law), to the great sur-
prise of the latter, who, being an officer of conspicuous
honor and courage, felt the necessity of accepting the
challenge ; but inquired of Mr. Loundes, who bore
the challenge, what offence he had given. Mr.
Loundes, however, although an intimate friend of the
challenging party, declared that he had no knowledge
whatever of the cause of the hostile message. The
duel took place, nevertheless, and Major Rutledge

2/O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

was wounded, although no one could ever tell what
was the cause of the hostile affair.

The Southern Bivouac, early in 1884, presented its
readers with the following graphic description of the
first duel (so called) in Kentucky:

Previous to the separation of Kentucky from Virginia
there were hostile meetings between her citizens, but the
combatants were usually plain pioneers, who, knowing little
and caring less about the code, settled their difficulties with
the weapons with which nature had armed them. They
battered and bruised with fists and feet, gouged out eyes
with their thumbs, and bit off ears and noses with their
teeth, and thus inflicted injuries which the chivalry of a
later day pronounced worse than the effects of the fatal
steel and deadly lead. The first duel a la mode in the State
of Kentucky was arranged at Louisville in 1792, and luckily
for all concerned, had a comic instead of a tragic termina-
tion. The principals and seconds were among the most
prominent citizens of that period, whose descendants are
yet in our midst, occupying the highest social positions.
John Thurston, a son of the celebrated fighting parson of
Virginia, who at the beginning of the War of Independence
laid aside his sacerdotal gown, put on the uniform of the
rebellion, raised a company and led it against the British,
was the challenging party. John Harrison, a member of
that distinguished family which gave a Governor to Virginia
and a President to the United States, who went into the
Revolutionary war a private and by brave deeds came out a
Major, was the challenged party. Robert Breckinridge, a
member of the convention which framed our first Constitu-
tion and sat as the first Speaker of our House of Represen-
tatives, was the second of Thurston, and Jacobus Sullivan, a
fearless pioneer, who would at any time avoid a good dinner
for what he called a good fight, was the second of Harrison.
In those early days the best citizens of each county were
commissioned by the Governors as Justices of the Peace.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 2/1

Thurston and Harrison had both held this office under
Governor Randolph of Virginia, and as soon as Governor
Shelby was seated in the Gubernatorial chair of Kentucky
he recommissioned them for Jefferson county. It was not
long after 'Squire Thurston opened his office in the new
State before he was called upon to try an issue between two
of his neighbors. It was Thurston's first case under his new
commission, and he saw in it the elements of a family quar.--
rel, which indicated that no matter what judgment he
might render one of his neighbors would be dissatisfied.
He therefore issued the warrant and made it returnable
before 'Squire Harrison for trial. Harrison, in trying the
case, discovered that it was based on family differences that
ought to be adjusted, and as it was his first case also in the
new State, he took particular pains to reconcile the parties.
He succeeded in bringing the parties to a better understand-
ing, rendered a judgment satisfactory to both, and, being
pleased with his own work, charged no fees. Soon after the
trial was over Thurston called on Harrison for the twelve and
a half cents allowed him by law for issuing the original warrant
in the case. Harrison told him he had charged no fees in the
case and had not collected the twelve and a half cents. Thurs-
ton replied that while it was Harrison's unquestioned right to
charge nothing for his own services, yet that right did not
extend to the remission of the fees of another for services
rendered. Harrison admitted that this was true, but said
that if he were to pay the twelve and a half cents it would
have to come out of his own pocket, and this he did not
intend should be done. One word brought on another until
a quarrel ensued, and epithets were exchanged that were
easier spoken than borne. They separated full of wrath,
with mutual assurances that each might expect to hear
further from the other. Thurston hurried from the scene,
sent for his friend Breckinridge, detailed the occurrence at
Harrison's office, and, without asking the advice of his
friend as to what should be done, handed him a peremptory
challenge with a request that he bear it immediately to
Harrison. Breckinridge did not like the lightning speed

2/2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

with which things were starting off, but in a kind of me-
chanical mode bore away the hostile note, and before the
sun of the same day was set handed it to Harrison. What
Harrison might have done if a little more time had been
allowed does not appear, but it is possible if he had not
received a challenge he would have sent one. As soon as
Harrison received Thurston's note he accepted its terms,
and named rifles at sixty yards as the weapons and distance.
Then summoning his friend Sullivan to his aid he directed
him without delay to arrange with Breckinridge the time
and place of meeting. Here Sullivan, like Breckinridge,
was hurried along with a rapidity he did not fancy, but
knew not how to avoid. The seconds got together the
night of the same day of the difficulty, and arranged for the
hostile meeting the next afternoon at a small opening in
the woods back of the present Broadway. When the place
of meeting was reached at the appointed time sixty yards
were stepped off by the seconds and the positions of the
principals designated. The rifles were then loaded by the
seconds — Breckinridge loading one and handing it to Sulli-
van for Harrison, and Sullivan loading the other and hand-
ing it to Breckinridge for Thurston. Everything was
conducted with the scrupulous courtesy indicative of the
ball-room rather than the duelling-field ; and no one would
have inferred from the countenances of Thurston and
Harrison that anything involving life was in contemplation.
The principals having been placed in position and their
rifles handed them, the seconds tossed a dollar for the word.
Breckinridge won ; but instead of turning at once to the
principals and giving the word, he asked Sullivan what he
thought of the affair, anyhow. Sullivan answered that the
movements had been so rapid that he had had no time to
think at all, and in turn asked Breckinridge what he thought.
Breckinridge replied that he did not like the appearance of
things, and feared that the world might misinterpret the
facts and assume that two prominent citizens had been
hurried into a duel about twelve and a half cents. Sullivan
admitted that such might be public opinion, and added that

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 2/3

if the duel should prove fatal it would be too bad for the
world to say two such citizens had slain one another for a
ninepence. The seconds, therefore, agreed to call the prin-
cipals together and try to reconcile them. When they got
together Breckinridge, in an earnest and feeling manner,
stated that he and Sullivan had just talked the matter over,
and were agreed that the meeting had been unwisely hurried
too far without the advice of friends, chosen for the purpose,
having been either asked or given ; that the fact of the diffi-
culty having arisen out of the twelve and a half cents allowed
a magistrate for issuing a warrant would lead many to say,
no matter how unjustly, that the duel was fought for that
paltry sum, and that such a reputation would be intolerable
for men in their positions. He reminded them that they
were both heads of families and civil officers, with other
claims than their own upon their lives and reputations ; that
although the affair had been too rapidly conducted to allow
hot blood to cool, there was yet time for reason to resume
her sway over passion; and then besought them as old
friends, with but a single jar in a life of unusual smoothness,
to forget and forgive a single offence, and act toward one
another as if nothing to ruffle their former feelings had
occurred. If there was any hesitation in the minds of the
principals as to the propriety of a reconciliation, after these
manly words of Breckinridge, it was not increased by the
unexpected speech and queer proposition of Sullivan which
followed. As soon as Breckinridge had ceased, Sullivan,
without waiting to hear what Harrison or Thurston might
say, spoke as follows : " Fellow-citizens, them's my senti-
ments ! It won't do for this fight to go on ! The Bargrass
people, whar 'Squire Thurston lives, will swar he fit for
twelve an' a half cents; and them bad town boys, where
'Squire Harrison lives, when he runs them out of his water-
million patch, will call him an 'old fightin' ninepence.' I
like a good fight better than a hot toddy of a cold night,
but I hate a bad fight worse than a nest of yaller-jackets.
There ain't no good in this fight, nohow. I don't like the
weepons, nuther. Rifles is all right for Injuns and bars, but

274 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

they are awful things turned agin friends. If you had
painted yer eyes black with yer fists, or even doubled one
another up by kicks in the belly, when you quarrelled, it
would have been reg'lar, but to go to borin' holes through
one another with rifle balls, like augers through poplar
logs, won't do at all. The commandment of the Scripter
says: 'Thou shalt not kill,' but it don't say thou s halt not
hit with the fist and kick with the foot when a feller makes
you mad. I propose, tharfour, that we wind up this fight
with a shootin'-match for a gallon of whiskey. Our side agin
your side will shoot at a tree the size of a man, sixty yards,
at the word, and the shot nearest the .centre wins." As soon
as Sullivan finished his speech, Thurston and Harrison, who
had both been compelled to laugh at its oddity, simulta-
neously extended to one another the right hand. A hearty
shake followed and the difficulty was all over. Nothing
now remained to be done on the ground but to have the
shooting-match proposed by Sullivan. A beech, about
the size of a man, was selected, at sixty yards, and Thurston
made the first shot. The tree was hit on the left side, and
Harrison acknowledged that, if he had been there, he should
have had a stitch in the side. Harrison shot next and hit
the tree in the centre. Thurston now acknowledged that if
he had been there he should have had a stomach-ache.
Breckinridge shot next, and hit midway between the shots
of Thurston and Harrison. All now agreed that this was
the shot of a mediator, and that it was in its proper place,
midway between the other two. Last of all, Sullivan shot,
and missed the tree. A hearty laugh followed at the ex-
pense of Sullivan, but he said he imagined the tree to be a
man shooting at him, and suggested that if the others had
shot at men shooting at them their shots might have been
different. The ball of Harrison having hit the centre, it
was decided that Thurston and Breckinridge must pay for
the liquor. Off all started in high good humor for the
grocery store of Charles Nabb to get the whiskey. A gallon
was measured into a stone jug, and after all had taken a
friendly glass the balance was voted to Sullivan for his

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 2?$

remarkable speech and shot. Sullivan bore off the jug in
triumph, and would often have gone through the same scene
for such a reward. Thurston and Harrison were the good
friends in after life that they had been before, and both of
them often told and joked of the intended serious meeting
that ended so comically.

A New York paper gives the following account of
a singular and fatal duel which was fought many
years ago in New York by the late Stephen Price, well
known in England as a former lessee of Drury Lane
Theatre:

Benjamin Price was considered the handsomest of his
family, though his brother Stephen was not to be despised,
either as regards good looks or abilities. Benjamin one
evening had escorted a very pretty woman to the Park
Theatre, when, during the performance, a British offi-
cer in an adjoining box took the liberty of staring her
full in the face. She complained of it to Ben Price, who,
on its repetition, seized the offender by the nose with " his
finger and thumb and wrung it most effectually." The offi-
cer left his box and went to Ben Price's. Ben in answer to
a knock opened the door, when the officer, whose name was
Green, asked Ben what he meant, remarking at the same
time that he meant no insult to the lady. " Oh ! very well,"
replied Ben, " neither did I mean to insult you by what I
did." Upon this they shook hands as sworn brothers, and
some time afterward Mr. Green went to Canada to join his
regiment. The facts of the affair, however, reached Canada
before Mr. Green did, and of course got noised about. An
officer of his regiment having a pique against him was par-
ticularly active in airing the scandal, and brought the matter
so strongly before his brother officers that one of them, a
Captain Wilson, insisted upon Green being ostracized unless
he went back to New York immediately and challenged
Price. Green, however, being no shot, he was allowed time
to get up his pistol practice to a favorable standard, and

276 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

having practised for five hours daily, until he could hit a
dollar at ten paces nine times out of ten, then he came to
New York and challenged Ben Price. They fought at
Hoboken, Price being killed at the first fire. The seconds
immediately decamped, while Green, who had obtained
leave to go to England on urgent private affairs, took a
small boat, crossed the river, and got on board a vessel in
the bay ready to sail for the old country. Price's body was
found where he had fallen, with a piece of paper attached to
the breast, on which were written the following words :
*' This is Benjamin Price, boarding in Vesey Street, New
York; take care of him." The body was brought to the
city quietly, and he was buried in New York. The death of
Ben Price was, however, but one-half of the tragic transac-
tion that resulted from the pulling of Mr. Green's nose.
Some years later Captain Wilson, who has been already re-
ferred to, arrived in New York from England on his way to
Canada, and put up at the Washington Hotel. There one
day at dinner the conversation turned on the death of Ben
Price and the manner thereof, when Captain Wilson, who
had joined in the conversation, took credit for having been
mainly instrumental in bringing about the duel, detailing all
the particulars connected therewith. This statement was
carried immediately to Stephen Price, who was lying ill of
the gout at home. His friends said that he at once implic-
itly obeyed the instructions of the physician, and, obtaining
thereby a short cessation of the gout, was enabled to hobble
out of doors, his lower extremities being swathed in flannel.
His first course was to seek the Washington Hotel, where
his inquiry was : " Is Captain Wilson within ?" " He is,"
said the waiter. "Show me up to his room," said Stephen,
and up he was shown accordingly. Hobbling up-stairs with
much difficulty, cursing alternately as he went the gout
which caused the pain and the Captain who was the cause
of his having to hobble with equal vehemence, he at last
reached Captain Wilson's room, his feet cased in moccasins
and his hand grasping a stick. Captain Wilson rose to re-
ceive him, wondering all the time who his lame visitor could

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

be, but his mind on that point was soon relieved. " Are
you Captain Wilson?" said the stranger. "That is my
name," replied the Captain. "Then, sir, my name is
Stephen Price. You see, sir, I can scarcely put one foot be-
fore the other ; I am afflicted with the gout. My object in
coming here is to insult you. Shall I have to knock you
down, or will you consider what I have said a sufficient in-
sult to act accordingly?" " No, sir," replied the Captain,
smiling; "I shall consider what you have said quite suffi-
cient, and shall act accordingly. You shall hear from me."
In due time there came a message from Captain Wilson to
Stephen Price ; time, place, and weapons were arranged ;
and early one morning a boat left New York in which were
seated face to face Stephen Price, the Captain, and two
friends. They all landed at Bedloe's Island, the principals
took their positions, and Captain Wilson fell dead at the
first shot. The Captain's body was interred in the vault
there, and Price and the two seconds returned to New
York. Captain Wilson's friends in America thought he had
departed suddenly to Canada, and his friends in England
thought he had either died suddenly or had been killed in a
duel on his way to join his regiment.

The Baltimore Sun of April 23, 1884, tells the fol-
lowing interesting story of a duelling family:

Dr. Robert Wright, whose death at Centreville, Md., in
his eighty-seventh year, was announced yesterday, was the
son of Solomon Wright, who was a judge of the Maryland
Court of Appeals from 1778 to 1801, and the grandson of
Solomon Wright, who was a distinguished lawyer, and
represented Queen Anne County in the Provincial Assem-
bly as far back as 1709-11. One of Dr. Wright's uncles was
Robert Wright, for whom he was named, one of the most
successful politicians that the Eastern Shore has ever pro-
duced. He was successively a member of the House of
Delegates, the State Senate, the United States House of
Representatives, and the United States Senate. In 1806 he

278 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

was elected Governor of Maryland, and at the time of his
death, in 1827, was a judge in the judicial circuit compris-
ing his native county. Dr. Wright was a gentleman of
varied information, and a mine of interesting reminisences
about men and affairs in his section of the State. Just a
year ago he wrote and published an interesting sketch of
his family. In this he stated that some of the Wrights had
a marked propensity for duelling, and narrated the following
anecdotes concerning those of his relatives who became in-
volved in affairs of honor : " Gov. Robert Wright fought a
duel with Gen. Lloyd, the former being shot in the wrist,
which ended the matter. Robert, son of the Governor,
fought with Alexander Stuart, and was shot in the shoulder.
Gustavus fought with Benjamin Nicholson. They both ex-
pected to be killed, and it is marvellous how they escaped
death, as each had two shots and were only stationed six to
eight feet apart. At the first shot Nicholson was shot in
the hand, and at the second in the side. The wound being
considered mortal ended the matter. Nicholson, as brave a
man as ever lived, recovered, and was aide to Gen. Z. Pike,
and, with Pike and his whole command, was blown up and
killed at Little York, now called Toronto, Canada, in the
war of 1812. Mr. Wright also had a duel with Capt. Wat-
son, whom he killed. Clinton had a duel with Lieut.
Jarman ; they had two shots. At the second shot Wright
was wounded in the arm. He afterward fought a duel with
Major Hook. Wright was shot down at the first shot, and,
being unable to stand, proposed to Hook to lie side by side
and take another shot. To this both Hook and his second
objected, and very properly, but said if they could make
Mr. Wright stand they would give him another exchange
of shots. Wright put his hand in his pocket, and drawing
out an old bandana handkerchief, gave it to his second, tell-
ing him to pass it under his arms and draw him up to the
limb of a small tree close by. This being done, they had
another exchange of shots, when Hook received what was
supposed to be a mortal wound, but both he and Wright
recovered. Henry R. Pratt (who married one of the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 279

Wrights) had a duel with William Elbert. He shot a bunch
of keys out of Elbert's pantaloons pocket, and, both being
thereby satisfied, kissed and made up. They afterward
became and continued fast friends. Another one of the
family was on the eve of a duel with Cadet Lindsey, of
Philadelphia, but a timely apology from Lindsey put a stop
to it. By way of showing that the Wrights were not quite
so bloodthirsty as some have endeavored to make them out,
I will say that in every instance, I believe, the Wrights were
the challenged parties."

28O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XV.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

Andrew Jackson's Famous Meeting with Charles Dickinson —
"Great God! have I missed him?"— The Iron Will of "Old
Hickory" — Sam Houston's Duel with General White — Gumming
and McDuffie — The Fatal Crittenden-Conway Duel in Arkansas
in 1830 — The Dreadful " Meeting of Major Riddle and Hon.
Spencer Pettis on Bloody Island in 1831 — Both Combatants
Mortally Wounded at the First Fire — The Weapons used by
Riddle and Pettis at present the Property of Innis Hopkins of
St. Louis — The Fatal Duel near Vicksburg between Menefee and
McClung — A Highly Dramatic Affair — Tragic End of a Poker
Game on the Mississippi — James Bowie Surprises a Gang of
Sharpers — A Duel upon the Wheel-houses of a Steamboat —
What came of a Military Man's Boasting.

THE fatal duel between General Andrew Jackson
and Charles Dickinson, which was fought near Adair-
ville (Tennessee), on the 3oth of May, 1806, ranks
among what are justly termed the noted American
duels; not only on account of the distinguished char-
acter of the combatants, but because they were in-
comparably " crack shots," and because each intended
to kill the other. Dickinson had invited a challenge
from Jackson by aspersing the character or social
standing of the wife of the latter. Each undoubtedly
expected to receive a mischievous bullet, but hoped,
at the same time, to dangerously wound or kill his
adversary. It was understood that there would be no

frOTED AMEKiCAtf DUELS. 28l

love or sentiment displayed during the hostile meet-
ing, and, of course, no white feather. Both men were
notoriously brave and unspeakably angry. Both were
experts with rifle and pistol; and Dickinson, while on
his way to the rendezvous, amused his associates by
displaying his wonderful skill with a pistol. Once, at
a distance of twenty-four feet, he fired four balls,
each at the word of command, into a space which
could be covered by a silver dollar. Several times he
cut a string with a bullet from the same distance. It
is related that he left a severed cord hanging near a
tavern, and said to the landlord as hg rode off: " If
General Jackson comes along this road, be kind
enough to show him that." The meeting took place
in the morning, and both parties appeared to be per-
fectly collected. The arrangement agreed upon was
that the pistols were to be held downward until the
word was given to fire, then each man was to fire as
soon as he pleased. As soon as the word was given
Dickinson raised his pistol and fired. A puff of dust
flew from the breast of'Jackson's coat, and his second
saw him raise his left arm and place it tightly across
his chest. The General, however, stood firm, while
Dickinson recoiled, crying out: "Great God! have I
missed him?" A moment after, Jackson took deliber-
ate aim and pulled the trigger, but the weapon
stopped at half-cock. He drew it back to its place,
took aim a second time, and fired. Dickinson reeled,
and his face turned white; and, as his friends hurried
toward him, he sunk upon the ground. The murder-
ous missle had passed through the body below the
ribs. It was only after this that it was discovered
that one of Jackson's shoes was full of blood. On
examination, it was found that the bullet from Dick.

282 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

inson's weapon had hit Jackson in the breast, break-
ing two ribs, and making a painful but not dangerous
wound. Dickinson lived until about nine o'clock in
the evening, at which hour he expired, having bled to
death. It was on this occasion that Andrew Jackson
exhibited his iron will by saying to his second that he
would have lived long enough to have killed his an-
tagonist even if he had been shot through the heart.
Jackson fought Dickinson for the honor of the woman
he loved. A description of this duel lately appeared
in the Louisville (Ky.) Courier- Journal, which called
out a communication from S. Park Baker, of Youngs-
town (N. Y.), which concluded as follows:

There is one feature about this duel with Dickinson, how-
ever, that seems a little peculiar, and that is that General
Jackson, who was a very spare man in his person, should
have been dressed in a loose-fitting gown or coat, so that his
antagonist could not readily tell the location of his body."
Dickinson aimed right; and if Jackson's body had been
where Dickinson supposed it was, and where, perhaps, the
code duello would say it ought to have been, there is no just
reason to doubt that General Jackson would at that time
have "passed in his checks;" for the ball from Dickinson's
pistol would have struck his heart beyond any doubt, accord-
ing to the account of the duel. Now, the criticism and
point I make in the character of " Old Hickory," in respect
to this duel, is this : Having dressed himself in a manner to
deceive Dickinson as to the precise location of his (Jack-
son's) body, and having received Dickinson's bullet without
any serious injury, it was not a just and fair thing in Jackson
afterward to take deliberate aim at Dickinson and kill him.
No matter what the provocation was on the part of Dickin-
son which led to the duel, it seems to me that, having re-
sorted to what was then considered an honorable method of
settling the difficulty, they were each bound to give the
other fair play ; and the only excuse or justification I can

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 283

find for General Jackson for his deliberate and premeditated
killing of Dickinson is the fact that, perhaps, upon general
principles, Dickinson ought to have been killed for slander-
ing so upright and honorable a woman as the wife of Gen-
eral Jackson.

Near Nashville (Tenn.) is the " Hermitage," which
is approached through a long row of cedars on either
hand. Here, says the Courier -Journal,

in this quaint old building, main rooms and shed-rooms of
brick, with wooden columns and wooden copings in front,
resided Colonel Andrew Jackson, adopted grandson of the
hero, with his wife and mother and two old negroes, man
and wife. He was about sixteen years old when it was
purchased by Jackson, nearly sixty years ago. General
Jackson and wife sleep side by side in the little garden
near the residence, each beneath a broad granite slab. In-
scribed in old-fashioned Roman letters are the words on the
slab which covers Mrs. Jackson, composed by her devoted
husband : " Here lie the remains of Mrs. Rachel Jackson,
wife of President Jackson, who died the 22d December,
1828." The old hero had been elected President for his first
term, but did not take his seat till March 4th following. The
inscription recounts her virtues in words forcible and tender :
"A being so gentle and yet so virtuous, vile slander might
wound but could not dishonor. Even death, when he tore
her from the arms of her husband, could but transport her
to the bosom of her God." The day of the funeral, Jackson,
feeble and heartbroken, walked slowly behind the coffin,
leaning upon a long cane he was accustomed at that time to
carry about his farm. As the friends of the dead gathered
about to look for the last time upon her face, General Jack-
son lifted his cane as if appealing to Heaven, and by a look
commanding silence, said, slowly and painfully, and with a
voice full of bitter tears : " In the presence of this dear
saint I can and do forgive all my enemies. But those vile
wretches who have slandered her must look to God for

284 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

mercy." One of the most beautiful and redeeming traits in
all this rugged and heroic nature was the unaltering love
and devotion he bore his wife. For seventeen years after
her death the memory of this noble woman was cherished,
until the summer of 1845, when he was laid to rest beside
the only woman he ever loved — loved with a romantic ten-
derness and strength surpassing the dream of fiction.

General Sam Houston, while M. C. from the Nash-
ville (Tennessee) district, in 1826, fought a duel with
General White, which created much excitement
throughout the United States at the time. The duel
was fought on the farm .of H. J. Duncan, in Simpson
County, about six miles south of Franklin. It was a
curious circumstance — that which brought about this
fight: Houston had sent to his constituents a number
of documents and some seeds for distribution, which
they had failed to receive, and for which failure he
blamed Postmaster Curry, of Nashville, whom he
denounced as a scoundrel. For this Curry sent
Houston a challenge by General White; who de-
clined to receive a cartel " from such a contemptible
source." "I am not surprised, sir," said White, ad-
dressing himself to Houston, "as no one who knows
you expected you would fight." "I will fight you,
sir, or any gentleman; but I will not fight a scoundrel
like Curry," replied Houston. "I am not sure of
that." "Try me." That same day White sent
Houston a challenge, which was promptly accepted,
and time, place, terms, and conditions named: on
the 23d of September, 1826, at sunrise, near the
State line; weapons, holster pistols; distance, fifteen
feet. The parties met, according to agreement, and
White fell dangerously (it was thought at the time
mortally) wounded at the first fire. Houston started

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 285

for the State line, about two hundred yards distant,
when he saw his adversary fall; but, upon hearing
White call, returned, and knelt by his side, when the
wounded man said: "General, you have killed me."
" I am very sorry for you, White," responded
Houston, " but you know it was forced upon me."
"I know it, and forgive you." White had been shot
through just above the hip, and the surgeons, to
cleanse the wound of blood, drew one of their old-
fashioned silk neckerchiefs through the bullet-hole.
Upon the complete recovery of White none were so
overcome with joy as the one who had narrowly es-
caped becoming his executioner.

Colonel Gumming, of Georgia, and Hon. George
McDuffie, of South Carolina, met near Sister's Ferry
(South Carolina), on the 8th of June, 1822, to settle a
political quarrel — which they did by firing at each
other once with pistols at twelve paces — Mr. McDuffie
receiving his adversary's bullet in the back just
below the short ribs. The South Carolinian, while
he declared his intention of firing a second shot, was
induced by his seconds and the surgeons of both
parties to retire from the field, they having assured
him that he had received a dangerous wound.
McDuffie's pistol was prematurely discharged, its
ball striking the ground about midway between the
combatants; and, although the distinguished states-
man never fully recovered from his severe wound, his
Georgia " friends" never let up on him for getting
shot in the back.

A remarkable meeting took place in Arkansas in
1830 between General Conway and Colonel Robert
Crittenden, in which the former was killed. These
two gentlemen were canvassing the (then) Territory

286 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

of Arkansas for delegate to Congress. Conway was
what was then politically termed a "Jackson man,"
while Crittenden sailed under Anti-Jackson colors.
A correspondent of the New York Courier and
Enquirer, who was present, tells the story of the duel,
as follows:

They met in debate at Little Rock. There was an im-
mense concourse of people in attendance, and party feeling
ran very high. The discussion became personal, and
Crittenden at the close of his second speech remarked that
he " trusted no gentleman would utter words in the heat of
debate toward him such as could not be tolerated by the
code of honor." Conway retorted in a torrent of bitter in-
vective and personal denunciation. Crittenden briefly and
calmly rejoined : " Your language, General Conway, admits
of only one answer ; and that, you may be sure, I will make
right speedily." A hostile message was sent the same day,
and the meeting arranged for the following morning. A
vast throng had collected to witness the duel, for there had
been no attempt made to conceal it. Ben Desha, a son of
Governor Desha, of Kentucky, was Crittenden's second, and
Colonel Wharton Rector was the second of Conway.
There was some delay in settling the preliminaries, at which
General Conway became impatient and excited, while
Crittenden remained perfectly cool, stretched quietly on a
blanket, with his eyes closed, as though he was sleeping.
Finally, the principals were called to their positions. The
spectators, says an eye-witness, at a glance contrasted their
aspect and bearing. Crittenden inherited the noblest of
human forms, with fair hair, blue eyes, and a lofty counte-
nance, frank and open in its expression, and wearing the
seal of death-defying bravery. He stood cool, collected, and
unconcerned, like a rifleman about to fire at a mark. But
Conway had a stern face, eyes dark as night, and his look of
indubitable courage was perceptibly tinged with revenge.
At length Desha gave the word in a voice that rang over the
hills like the peal of a trumpet— Fire ! One— Two— Three !

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 287

At the sound " Fire " Conway raised his weapon and
drew the trigger. His bullet grazed Crittenden's breast and
cut a button off his coat, without more injury. But
Crittenden waited until the last echo of the word "Two,"
and then his pistol exploded. General Conway dropped to
the earth like lead. The ball had pierced his heart.
Crittenden died of fever a few years after these events.

On the 27th of August, 1881, Mr. Edward Dobyns,
of Fulton (Mo.), addressed the editor of the St. Louis
Globe-Democrat the following interesting communica-
tion:

Just fifty years years ago to-day, August 27, 1831, at three
o'clock P.M., Major Biddle, of the United States Army, and
the Hon. Spencer Pettis, only member of Congress from
Missouri, met on Bloody Island, opposite St. Louis, to
settle an affair of honor. They took position at five feet
apart and exchanged shots. Both fell mortally wounded,
and were borne across the river by their respective friends
to their homes. It was my privilege to stand by the bed-
side of the dying statesman through a night of
pain and agony. Never can I forget the look of
the young statesman. He turned his head, and looking
me in the face, said : " Oh, if I can only survive this."
I well knew the meaning of these words. Nor can I
forget the majestic form and noble bearijig of the late
Hon. James H. Peck, then Judge of the United States .
District Court for the District of Missouri, who passed that
memorable night at the bedside of Mr. Pettis, cheering and
encouraging him in his last hours;— in this showing his
gratitude for kindnesses Mr. Pettis had shown him when he
(Judge Peck) had been impeached and tried before the
Senate of the United States for "alleged charges of oppression
of a distinguished lawyer of St. Louis, Colonel Luke E.
Lawless. Though an avowed political enemy to the party
to which Mr. Pettis belonged, I felt there was a beauty and
moral grandeur surrounding the scene, and there was.

288 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Gratitude is one of the noblest instincts of man. Just as
death was approaching Mr. Pettis gave a deep moan.
Judge Peck said : " Mr. Pettis, you have shown yourself a
brave man, now die like a man." Mr. Pettis replied, " Yes,
sir." I believe these were his last words. On the morning
of August 28, 1831, about ten o'clock, his spirit left its
frail tenement and passed away. Major Biddle survived
until three o'clock Sunday morning, when his strong consti-
tution and athletic frame yielded to the fatal wound, and
his spirit took its flight. Thus ended this tragic affair
which has been so much misrepresented.

The pistols used in the Biddle-Pettis duel are at
present owned by Innis Hopkins, of St. Louis, having
been left him by his father, Colonel Brent Hopkins,
who died at Henderson (Kentucky) on the yth of
March, 1884. It has been stated that these same
pistols were used by Hamilton and Burr, which is a
positive mistake; as the latter are owned by a gen-
tleman of Rochester (N. Y.), and are three inches
longer than these used at Bloody Island: they were
once the property of Aaron Burr, however, who
brought them from England upon his return to his
native land. They were manufactured by H. W.
Mortimore, of London, gunmaker to his Majesty.
The pistol which was used by Pettis may be identi-
fied by a long deep notch indented on the handle — the
one used by Burr is marked by a cross filed under
the lower part of the barrel. The barrels of these
pistols are thirteen inches long and carry an ounce
ball. They have flint-locks; the pans for the priming
are lined with gold, and the touchholes are bushed
with the same metal. They are hair- triggers, and
shoot with great force and accuracy. The locks are
pieces of very superior mechanism. The pair came
into the possession of Colonel Brent Hopkins, through

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 289

his uncle, Captain Samuel Goode Hopkins, U. S.
A., who purchased them from Burr, paying him a
large amount for them. The weapons have 'surely
a blood-stained history. They have been used with
fatal effect in eleven duels. Pettis killed Biddle
with one of them; Edward Towns of Virginia killed
a Frenchman near New Orleans; Captain Sam
Goode Hopkins killed a Spanish Count near New
Madrid (Mo.); Hugh Brent killed a man from
Georgia on Diamond Island, below Henderson (Ky.),
and they were used several times in Virginia, twice
in South Carolina, and more than once in Kentucky,
with deadly effect.

McClung and Menefee met near Vicksburg a short
time before the Mexican War in the presence of a
large number of spectators. The weapons were
Mississippi rifles, distance sixty yards. McClung
was a dead shot, having never missed his man, while
Menefee, who had lately arrived in Mississippi from
Kentucky, was no novice with shooting-irons. The
description of the duel is thus told by a correspond-
ent:

Sixty yards was the distance chosen, and when the
seconds went to measure off the ground it was with great
difficulty that the crowd could be forced back so as to allow
the fight to go on. The positions were taken and the rifles
were placed in the combatants' hands. "Are you ready?"
" Ready," both firmly responded. " Fire; one, two" —
Here Menefee's rifle exploded, and the bullet whistled by
the head of McClung and lodged in a tree that appeared to
be on an exact line with the body of the latter. To the sur-
prise of everybody, instead of firing his piece, McClung at-
tempted to break it in half, and with a fierce oath hurled it
a distance of twenty feet away, where it alighted upon a pile
of sand and stuck, muzzle down, several feet in it. The

290 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

seconds soon learned the cause of this strange action — the
gun had hung fire. It was rescued, the sand removed from
the muzzle, and reloaded. After an interval of ten minutes
the combatants resumed their positions, and the crowd
gathered around them again. During the interval many
bets had been wagered on the result of the duel, the odds
being generally in favor of Menefee, who was a popular
favorite, and who, moreover, was generally supposed to be
more proficient with the rifle. The word was again given.
This time McClung's piece was more faithful. Before
Menefee's finger had pressed the trigger of the rifle that of
McClung had been discharged, and the ball, striking the
cock of Menefee's gun, hurled a piece of it deep into the
brain of the unfortunate young man, who fell, and died
before he could be removed from the field.

In ante-bellum times nowhere on the continent
were more exciting scenes witnessed than in the
cabins of some of the Mississippi river steamers, and
of these none were more dramatic and tragical than
the following incident. Gambling, oftentimes for
the highest stakes, was universal, particularly on the
New Orleans packets, and professional gamblers fre-
quently made these boats their homes. Much has
been written concerning the lives and characters of
these men, and many are the incidents related in
which they bore conspicuous, if not always honorable,
parts. Amongst the various gambling scenes that
have occurred on western and southern rivers, there
is one which should not be forgotten, the more so as
one of the principal actors in the event is known
throughout the country to have been a man of tried
bravery and courage, and his name, James Bowie, is
always associated with the idea of fearlessness. In
a recent conversation with an old steamboatman, a
reporter of the St. Louis Republican learned of the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 29 1

following, which occurred on board the steamer
Orleans, Captain Davis — father of Captain John B.
Davis, late of the Diamond Jo line — master, in the
Fall of 1832. At that time the river steamers were be-
ginning to be infested with organized bands of gam-
blers, which in a few years embraced in their ranks
as allies and confederates many of the barkeepers
and other officers of the boats of higher rank, and
with their assistance and connivance many a planter
was robbed of his all and driven to suicide or mur-
der. In the Fall of the year the merchants and
planters of the country along the lower river went
East to purchase goods or to collect the proceeds of
the year's crop of cotton or sugar, and their arrival
at and departure from New York were carefully
noted by emissaries of the gamblers. If it was
known that they carried back to the West or South
any large amount of money, they were watched, and
an efficient gang of sharps was placed upon their
tracks. In the summer of 1833 a young gentleman
of Natchez, who had just been married, made an ex-
tended wedding trip to the North, and on his way
back home had stopped in New York to collect a
number of bills which had been intrusted to him for
collection by planters at and near Natchez, and the
amount in the aggregate was quite large. Shortly
after his arrival in New York the young man was
spotted, and his acquaintance made by several of the
gambling fraternity, but, though they tried hard to
do so, they failed to inveigle him into any of their
dens. When he had transacted his business there
the young man started for home with his wife, but,
knowing of his probable route, a well-organized gang
started ahead of him, leaving two of the fraternity to

292 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

accompany their intended victim and keep him in
sight. Learning at Pittsburg that he would take a
steamer there for Louisville, where he would remain
a few days, and then take one of the New Orleans
packets for Natchez, they joined him on the boat,
and on the trip to Louisville card playing was intro-
duced to while away the time. Having been allowed
to win small sums, by the time they had reached
Louisville the victim imagined he knew all about the
game. This game, which at the time referred to was
much in vogue, was called 20-card poker, and was
played with the tens, jacks, and queens, kings, and
aces of the pack, and as but four could play at a
time the game was admirably adapted for what is
known to the gambling fraternity as "three pluck
one." After a pleasant visit in Louisville the young
man took passage on the steamer Orleans for Natchez.
The gentlemen's cabin, where all the card-playing
was done, was on the main deck, directly under the
ladies' cabin. Instead of the round wheel-houses
now seen, the Orleans' were square, flat on top, and
came up to within two feet of the hurricane deck,
and the distance between them was about thirty-five
feet. Not long after leaving Louisville card-playing
was resumed, and so effectually had the gamblers car-
ried out their scheme that they had won nearly all
their victim's money before reaching Vicksburg, and
had intended to complete their work before Natchez
was reached, a comparatively easy task, as he was
drunk and desperate. A few miles above Vicksburg
a tall, straight, and dignified gentleman, having much
the appearance of a preacher, got aboard the boat,
and in a few minutes took a seat near the gamblers,
where he could see all that was going on. Several

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 293

times during the continuance of the game, and after
the tall stranger had come aboard, the young wife
of the gamblers' victim had besought him to leave
their company, but in vain, so deep was the infatua-
tion of the game, and so strong his belief that he
could yet win back the money which he. had lost.
Play continued into the night, and by i o'clock in
the morning his money was all won from him, and,
rendered desperate by the knowledge that he had
been recreant to the trust reposed in him, the victim
rose from his seat and rushed wildly to the side of
the boat, intent upon self-destruction, but just as he
was in the act of springing overboard he was seized
by a grip of iron and held, and, his young wife ap-
pearing at that time, he was taken to his room by
the stranger, who assured her that all would be right
if she would only keep her husband in the room until
his return. Returning to the cabin, where the gam-
blers and their friends were standing around the bar
drinking, the stranger drew out of his pocket a well-
filled wallet, and taking out of it a $100 bank note,
asked the barkeeper to change it for him. This the
barkeeper could not do, but referred him to the prin-
cipal gambler, saying: " This gentleman can change
it for you." "Oh, yes," he answered at once, "won't
you take a drink?" Thanking him, the stranger ac-
cepted the invitation, and whilst the change was
being made, just touched his glass to his lips. The
gamblers had all seen the well-filled wallet, and, as
the stranger casually remarked that he stopped at
Natchez, they determined to try to catch and fleece
him. One of them remarked that he did not care to
go to bed, and proposed that another game be played,
to which, of course, the others agreed, but, as there

294 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

were but three of them who understood the game, and
it required four to play it, the stranger was invited
to join them, which, after a little hesitation on his
part, he assented to. The game began by the
stranger being allowed to win several large bets.
But he kept his eyes open, and although they did
not know it, he was perfectly aware of what was
going on. After playing for about an hour, and just
as day was breaking, the gamblers concluded to
finish by giving the stranger a hand which would
induce him to bet largely, and as there were three of
them, and he could not call, they felt certain they
could force him to put up all he had before they
would allow him to have a show. Everything worked
as they had anticipated ; the man opposite the
stranger dealt the cards and the man on his right
went $10 blind; the ante was $5. When the cards
were dealt the stranger put up $20, and the next
man did the same, when the dealer raised him $20,
putting up $40. When it came to the turn of the
one who made the blind he put up $130, thus raising
it $100. The stranger quietly put up the requisite
amount, and when the next man bet $100 more, the
next man, the dealer, then threw up his hand and drew
out. The two remaining gamblers then kept raising
the bet whenever it came their turn, the stranger
coolly putting up whatever sum was necessary until
the total amount on the table was fully $100,000, of
which the stranger had contributed one third. Whilst
the betting was going on the stranger had kept his
eye on the dealer and had, by his watchfulness, pre-
vented any changing of cards. Toward the last he
saw a card slipped by the dealer to the man who had
made the blind, when, seizing him by the wrist with

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 295

one hand, he drew a murderous looking knife with
the other and forced the gambler to lay his cards on
the table face down. All sprang to their feet and
the stranger quietly said that when that hand was
raised and it should be found to contain six cards,
he would kill the owner; telling the other to show
his cards, he threw down his own hand, which con-
sisted of four kings and a ten spot. The baffled
gambler, livid with rage and disappointment, swore
that the stranger should fight him, demanding, with
an oath, to know who he was anyway. Quietly, and
as if in the presence of ladies, the stranger answered,
"James Bowie." At the sound of that name two of
the gamblers quailed, for they knew that the man
who bore that name was a terror to even the bravest;
but the third, who had never heard of " James
Bowie," demanded a duel at once. This was ac-
ceded to at once by Bowie, with a smile; pistols —
derringers — were the weapons selected, the hurri-
cane-roof the place, and the time at once. Sweeping
the whole of the money into his hat, Bowie went to
the room where the unhappy wife sat guarding her
husband's uneasy slumbers, and, rapping on the door,
he handed her, when she had opened it, the hat and
its contents, telling her that if he did not come back,
two thirds of the money was her husband's and the
balance his own. Ascending to the hurricane-roof
the principals were placed one upon the top of each
wheel-house. This brought them about twelve yards
apart, and each was exposed to the other from the
knee up. The pistols were handed to them and the
gambler's second gave the word, "one, two, three,
fire, stop," uttered at intervals of one second each,
and they were allowed to fire at any time between

296 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the utterance of the words one and stop. As "one"
rang out in the clear morning air both raised their
weapons, as " three" was heard the gambler's pistol
rang out and before the sound had ceased and whilst
the word "fire" was being uttered, Bowie's pistol
sounded, and simultaneous with this sound the gam-
bler fell, and giving a convulsive struggle rolled off
the wheel-house into the river. Bowie coolly blew
the smoke out of his pistol, shut down the pan (the
flint-lock was in use at the time), and going down
into the ladies' cabin obtained his hat and divided
the money which it contained into three portions.
Two of these he gave to the young wife and the
other he kept, as it was his own money. Having
awakened her husband, the fond wife showed him
the money, and told him all she knew about the
affair, not having heard of the duel. When the hus-
band became acquainted with all the facts, his grati-
tude to his benefactor was deep and lasting. Not
desiring to be made a hero of, Bowie, when the boat
reached Rodney, determined to go ashore; and as he
was leaving the boat both the husband and wife
clung to him as though he was a father leaving them.
It was afterward ascertained that the amount which
Bowie returned to the wife was within less than $100
of the sum which the gamblers had won from her
husband.

A Buffalo (N. Y.) correspondent of the New York
Times writes as follows, under date of August n,
1883:

One of the handsomest residences along the Niagara
River is that of W. C. Allen, near the head of Grand Island.
A portion of his lawn now occupies a spot which should
have no little historical interest. The incident giving it that

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 297

interest is probably little known outside of local circles, and
is now recalled only through the existence of a document
which has been preserved in a prominent family now resi-
dent at Niagara Falls. This document is as follows:

" A meeting took place between General Smyth and Gen-
eral Porter yesterday afternoon on Grand Island in pur-
suance of previous arrangements. They met at Dayton's
Tavern, and crossed the river with their friends and sur-
geons. Both gentlemen behaved with the utmost coolness
and unconcern. A shot was fired in as intrepid and firm a
manner as possible by each gentleman, but without effect.
It was then represented by General Smyth's second that
General Porter must now be convinced that the charge of
cowardice against General Smyth was unfounded, and should
in honor be retracted, which, after mutual explanations as
to the matters which had given rise to the charge, was ac-
cordingly done by him.

" General Smyth then explained that his remarks on Gen-
eral Porter were the result of irritation, and were intended
as provocation from having been assailed by General Porter,
and that he knew nothing derogatory to General Porter's
character as a gentleman and an officer. The hand of recon-
ciliation was then offered and received.

"We congratulate the friends of these gentlemen upon
this fortunate termination of a difference arising from too
much precipitation, but which has been adjusted in a man-
ner so honorable to both.

"WILLIAM H. WINDER,
"SAMUEL ANGUS.

"BLACK ROCK, Dec. 13, 1812."

In 1810 General Peter B. Porter was a resident of Canan-
daigua, which was then the most prominent place in western
New York, much of which was, in fact, but little more than
a wilderness. In the year named he was elected to Con-
gress, but, disliking political life, he retired from it the next
year and removed to Black Rock, where he owned large
estates, which are now a portion of Buffalo. He resided
there at the breaking out of the war of 1812, and as the

298 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Canadian frontier was to be an important strategic point in
the contest, all of the militia of western New York was
ordered for service at the various points along the frontier.
General Porter was appointed to the command of the militia
by the Governor of the State, to act in concert with the
regular troops, which were placed under command of a
Virginian named Alexander Smyth. The latter had no
military experience, except in a local way, but he was a man
of great assurance, and of a bombastic, vainglorious dispo-
sition. Porter's headquarters were at Black Rock, and
Smyth's were nearby. "Soon after establishing himself at
Black Rock," says a gentleman to whom General Porter
related the circumstances fifty years ago, "General Smyth
issued a long proclamation to his troops, couched in the
most extravagant language and filled with boasting prog-
nostications of what he intended to do with the British
upon the opening of Spring. The tenor of the proclamation
was that if Spring opened early and favorably he would im-
mediately invade Canada, capture all of its strongholds, and
put a summary end to the war. This bombastic document
made the egotistical Southerner the subject of the greatest
ridicule both in and out of camp. It so disgusted Gen-
eral Porter that he charged openly that such language and
silly boastfulness could not emanate from a man of courage
and bravery. This remark of General Porter was commu-
nicated at once to General Smyth, and he sent at once a
fiery challenge to General Porter to meet him on the field
of honor and test his courage. General Porter was not a
duellist nor a believer in duelling, but, holding the position
he did, he did not feel that he could decline this challenge,
and he promptly accepted it. He selected General William
Winder, of the regular army, as his second, and General
Smyth chose Adjutant Samuel Angus, of his command.
Dayton's Tavern, where the parties met, was then a well-
known hostelry of that day, but was long ago torn down.
Its site is six miles below Buffalo, on the banks of the
Niagara River, and is now occupied by the residence of the
John A. Hopkins family. The official report of the duel

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 299

reads well, but General Porter always said that General
Smyth's bearing and conduct during the affair were in no
way calculated to convince any one that he was courageous
or in any way fitted for a military command. Smyth gave
up his command soon afterwards, and returned to Virginia,
He was returned to Congress for his district for several
years, where his manners made him the constant butt of his
fellow-Congressmen."

300 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XVI.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

Journalistic Encounters — Editors who have Backed Up their
Opinions with Swords, Pistols, Knives, Rifles, Shotguns,
Blunderbusses, and Yagers — Fatal Meetings in Virginia — A
Bloody Affair at Belle Isle — Messrs. Beirne and Elam's Pictur-
esque Drama — Joaquin Miller's Symposium — Belligerent Mis-
sissippi Editors — A Fighting Newspaper and no Mistake —
Louisiana Belligerents — Creole Punctiliousness — Duels among
California Editors — Gilbert and Denver — John Nugent's Two
Duels — Badly Wounded in both — Carter and DeCourcey —
Washington and Washburne — Will Hicks Graham's Desperate
Duels with Frank Lemon and General William Walker, the
Great Filibuster — Calvin B. MacDonald's Graphic Description
of the Tevis-Lippincott Duel — The Meeting between Judge
Stidger and Colonel Rust — A Clash between Northern and
Southern Pluck — Wilson and Beane — James Watson Webb
and Thomas F. Marshall — Gibson and Irving, of Tennessee —
Bynum and Perry, of South Carolina — James Gordon Bennett
and Fred May, of New York — Goodman and Fitch, of Nevada
— An Episode of Mobile, after the War — How two Men
Fought with Rifles and afterward " Drowned their Sorrows in
the Flowing Bowl."

TIME was when the average American editor was
liable to be called upon to defend his printed state-
ments upon a hostile field; and it is a noteworthy fact
that many an unfortunate scribe has been ceremoni-
ously slain — thus proving conclusively that the pen is
not always mightier than the sword. Seriously, the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 3OI

practice of duelling prevailed to a considerable ex-
tent among American journalists in ante-bellum days,
and especially among the editorial brotherhood in
the States lying south of the so-called "Mason and
Dixon's line" and in the States and Territories of the
u Far West." Many famous meetings have taken place
among belligerent members of the Virginia press, one
of the most noted being that fatal one a number of
years before the Southern Rebellion between Mr.
Ritchie (of the Richmond Enquirer] and John Hamp-
den Pleasants (of the Richmond Whig). Ritchie
was the editor of a violent Democratic paper, while
Pleasants was an uncompromising Whig. A per-
sonal attack in the columns of one paper, responded
to by a no less personal answer in the other, resulted
in a challenge and a meeting. The scene was Belle
Isle, the little islet in the James River, at Richmond.
Here, in sight of the city's busy streets, the two
editors met and fought. They had each gone to the
fray armed with duelling pistols and swords. The
conditions of the fight, as agreed upon by their
seconds, were that after the first fire with the pistols,
if neither should be hurt, they should have recourse
to their swords. The swords remained in their scab-
bards, however, for at the first shot Pleasants fell
dead in his tracks. On the i2th of June, 1869,
Robert W. Hughes (of the Richmond State Journal)
and William E. Cameron (of the Richmond Index)
fought with pistols in North Carolina, and the latter
was hit in the breast at the first fire. In March, 1843,
Melzer Gardner, editor of the Portsmouth (Va.)
Chronicle, was killed by a lawyer named Mordecai
Cook, Jr., on Ferry Wharf; and on the following day
a mob threatened to tear down Cook's house, at

302 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

which Mrs. Cook took fright and died in a few hours.
During the Summer of 1883 Messrs. Beirne and Elam
(respectively of the Richmond State and Despatch)
created a great sensation throughout the whole coun-
try by their picturesque drama, which culminated in
the wounding of Elam. E. W. Johnson and J. M.
Daniel, Virginia editors, met at or near Bladensburg
in 1852, exchanged harmless shots, and then retired
friends. During the following year Robert Ridge-
way (a Virginia editor) and HOJI. S. G. Davis en-
gaged in a similar affair at Bladensburg.

On the 20th of October, 1883, Joaquin Miller,
who had been studying the traits of a number of the
modern duellists of Virginia, writes, felicitously, as
follows from Richmond to the San Francisco
Chronicle:

"Going down South as far as Richmond, are you? Well,
let me give you a letter to my friend Beirne, editor of the
State" "What ! Beirne, the fighting editor, who shot Elam
last Summer, and who fought United States Senator Riddle-
berger ? Yes, give me a letter to this gay duellist. I want
to see him. I want to ask him just exactly how a man feels
when standing face to face with a Christian gentleman only
ten steps away, waiting for the word of death. I will make
a letter of it. I will publish it to the world exactly as he
tells it to me — word for word, letter for letter. It will make
good reading ; maybe it will do good. It will certainly do
no harm." Finding I was really interested in duellists, my
friend gave me a cordial letter not only to Beirne, editor
of the State, at Richmond, but also to Mr. C., editor and
owner of the Dispatch, as was his father before him. This
latter gentleman has in fact been in even more mortal com-
bats than Mr. Beirne. But they were not quite so recent nor
so fresh in my mind ; in fact, not nearly so picturesque as
the singular duel between Beirne and Elam last Summer, in

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 303

which the latter was thought to be mortally wounded for
the second time. And so my heart went out with a bound-
less desire to see, to shake hands, if I could do it safely,
with this bloody duellist, who had shot down Elam, grace-
fully lifted his hat, bowed good-morning to him as he lay
there in his blood on the grass, and turned back to his work
at the editorial desk as if nothing had happened. As I
whirled away on the road to Richmond I recalled the comic
as well as the serious incidents of the Beirne-Elam duel last
Summer. You may remember that they went from Rich-
mond to West Virginia to fight ; were arrested at once,
released on giving security to keep the peace in that State,
and so agreed to fight somewhere else. You will also re-
member that it was afterwards and finally settled that
Beirne was to meet Elam several hundred miles distant in
Virginia, but somehow the word did not reach Beirne so
soon as expected informing him of the place of meeting ;
that he had set out at midnight and in the midst of a
thunder-storm ; that there was no railway and the journey
had to be made on horse-back and by carriage. You will
recall the fact of this bloodthirsty gentleman in his zeal to
reach the spot in time being washed away by a mountain
stream, borne half a mile down in the freshet, carriage and
all, drowning his horses and barely escaping with his life.
But he crawled out of the water and kept on. Then to add
to all this the officers of the law were close on his heels, and
were only kept back by the dangerous mountain torrents.
You may remember, too, that at one mountain hamlet the
officers lodged in the house while the duellist, whom they
supposed still ahead of them, was cosily and peacefully
sleeping in the chicken-coop, while the seconds kept watch
and cleaned and dried the pistols for the deadly encounter
on the morrow. Well, you see, I did not care so much
about this funny part of it, but what I wanted was to get
right at the heart of the man's heart, if you will pardon the
expression. I wanted a candid, square man to tell me just
precisely how he felt, whether angry still ; whether bitter at
heart, or kind and forgiving ; whether he did not wish he

304 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

hadn't come after all and let the other fellow have his say
and his way, rather than have at the last to plug an ounce
bullet in his breast, and send him home a bleeding corpse
to his wife and babes. The day after my arrival in Rich-
mond I sent my letters of introduction to the newspaper
offices and waited the result. About noon the cards of the
two famous duellists came up together. This was delicious.
Now I indeed should know all about the singular sensation
of standing before a Christian gentleman and looking down
the muzzle of his pistol as the moments swelled into hours
while waiting the words, " one, two, three — Fire T The
handsome young editor of the Dispatch put me at ease at
once by his quiet and graceful way of bidding me welcome
to Richmond. But the other man absorbed all my atten-
tion instantly. Desperate? Tall, gaunt, bony and blood-
thirsty? Why, God bless your soul, he is the sleekest,
sleepiest, best-fed, fattest, best-natured looking editor in
the United States. His blue eyes are mild as a child's.
He looks and acts in fact like a great big green boy just
out of school. And intellectually, he looks as if, like my-
self, he had never been quite able to enter into familiar
relations with the multiplication table, or even any high
degree of mental arithmetic. Permit me to say here, by
way of parenthesis, so that my friends in California may not
be uneasy on my account, that before this sketch is pub-
lished I shall be on my way either to London or San Fran-
cisco. Well, after the ordinary salutations we sat down and,
ordered cigars. No ; they would not smoke, these young
fire-eaters. " I never smoke but one cigar a day and that is
at night," calmly said the editor of the Dispatch, as he
toyed with his cane and glasses. Then I had brandy
brought up, as I had been taught to believe that these
bloody duellists and Southerners lived on brandy when they
could not get blood to drink. No ; they would not drink at
all. The big, green schoolboy who had stretched so many
of his enemies on the grass said he never drank anything
stronger than beer, and only a glass or two of that toward
the close of the day, when his work was done. I did not

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 305

see just then any good opportunity to wedge in an inquiry
directly about duels, as the conversations led over the ordi-
nary routes of congratulation and inquiry as to the various
features of the South, and so felt a bit disappointed. But
when they arose to leave it was to my infinite delight ar-
ranged that we should all three, along with an old Califor-
nian, also a dead shot and duellist, go out driving under the
magnolia trees and through the beautiful and sadly impres-
sive Richmond Cemetery. The first thing these three duel-
lists did was to drive me to the famous club-house here, cel-
ebrated not only for its wide-door hospitality, but for many
costly and historical pictures. That of Pocahontas seemed
to abound everywhere. How many Virginians have de-
scended from Pocahontas it is hard to say. But if any ten
other Indians had increased as she is supposed to have in-
creased it is safe to say that the race of savages, so far from
perishing from the earth, would to-day, numerically at
least, be in the ascendant over the Saxon. At this elegant
club my recollection- is that these three duellists ordered
brandy and seltzer, but as they drank only seltzer they left
me nothing but brandy. I had to drink what was left, for
no wise man will be particular when alone with three duel-
lists. The conversation as we sat there took a historic turn
— the early settlement of Virginia, the great battle just out
at the edge of the town at what is still called Bloody Run,
the Indians, the generosity of Virginia in giving half a
dozen States to the Union and receiving, asking, indeed, not
one cent for all that boundless domain. Then we had more
brandy and seltzer, divided up as before. By this time I
had mustered- a little valor and tried to get my shoulder
under the conversation and lift it up into the atmosphere of
the field of honor, but just then the black boy in buttons
called out the carriage at the club-house door, and in a mo-
ment more we were driving toward the great cemetery under
the beautiful magnolia trees, up the banks of the classic
James, overlooking Belle Island. Nearly a mile of the most
delightful drive on this earth, so far as scenery goes, peeps
through the trees — a drop-curtain for a theatre, in fact, at

306 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

almost every turn of the wheel — and we drove through the
gate, with its great broken ivy-covered columns.

The Mississippi editors were quite as hostile as the
Virginians. In 1838 Dr. James Hagan, of the Vicks-
burg Sentinel, fought with the editor of the Vicks-
burg Whig, and the latter was wounded. In 1843
Hagan was assassinated on a public street in Vicks-
burg by Daniel W. Adams, who admitted the shoot-
ing at the Coroner's inquest, and said that he had
killed Hagan on account of an article written by the
latter reflecting on Judge George Adams, of Jackson
(Mississippi), father of Daniel. In June, 1842, James
F. Fall, one of the editors of the Sentinel, fought with
T. E. Robins, of the Railroad Bank, and was wound-
ed. In May, 1844, Robins again met an editor of the
Sentinel, James M. Downs, and the latter was wound-
ed. They fought with "yagers,." at fifteen paces.
Shortly after this affair Captain Walter Hickey, a
fresh Sentinel editor, had a meeting, with revolvers,
with Dr. Macklin, and the latter was mortally wound-
ed. After this duel Hickey came out best in several
encounters in and around Vicksburg, but was finally
"laid out" in Texas by Joseph Moses, in 1849. In
1845 James Ryan, another Sentinel editor, was sent to
his last account by R. E. Hammet, of the Whig.
Still later, an editor of the Sentinel named Jenkins was
killed by H. A. Crabbe, who was afterward beheaded
in Sonora.

In 1851 John William Frost, one of the editors of
the New Orleans Crescent, and Dr. Thomas Hunt, a
distinguished physician of New Orleans, fought near
the United States Barracks, below the city, with
double-barrelled shotguns, and the editor was mor-
tally wounded at the second shot and died in half an

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 307

hour. Dr. Hunt was the challenged party. A few
months previous to this fatal affair, Messrs. Walker
and Kennedy, both editors of New Orleans papers,
had met with pistols at twelve paces, exchanged shots,
and retired satisfied. In 1852 E. T. Carroll, editor of
the Crescent, and J. M. Barbagon, met near Lake
Ponchartrain, with rifles, took two shots at each other
without effect at forty paces, and then declared their
difficulties at an end. In 1853, Mr. Cohen (editor of
the New Orleans Staats Zeitung) and Dr. Wintzel (of
the Deutsche Zeitung) met with pistols, and at the first
shot Cohen was dangerously wounded. In August,
1843, there was a desperate encounter between J.
Hueston, editor of the Baton Rouge (La.) Gazette,
and Alcee Lambranche, M. C. from that district.
The parties met at "The Oaks," with double-bar-
relled shotguns, loaded with ball, distance forty yards,
and Hueston fell mortally wounded at the fourth fire.
In 1825 Michael De Armas was a notary and attorney
of New Orleans, and a representative of a fine old
Spanish family. During his term of office a Mr.
Jackson, an editor of a New Orleans paper, criticised
De Armas one morning severely. Michael was both
a French and Spanish scholar, but spoke very little
and read no English. Seventeen years younger than
Michael was his brother Felix. The latter read the
English as well as the French and Spanish news-
papers. Felix perused with horror the article re-
ferred to, and in the afternoon called upon Mr. Jack-
son, and said: "I fear, Mr. Jackson, that you are

laboring under some misapprehenson " "Don't

you give yourself any uneasiness, Mr. De Armas; I
am laboring under no misapprehension." " But you
will permit me " "No, sir, I will permit " "I

30S THE FIELD Of HONOR.

was merely going to say, Mr. Jackson, that you will
permit me to demand that satisfaction which one
gentleman has a right to demand from another."
"Oh, certainly; that is the custom of the country,
you know." Jackson received and accepted the chal-
lenge from Felix De Armas the same day, and upon
the following morning the two gentleman met with
pistols, near the U. S. Barracks, and Jackson fell dead
at the first fire. Michael knew nothing of the affair
until he read of it in detailed form in the afternoon
edition of his favorite French paper.

Hostile meetings among California journalists were
quite frequent during the early days of the Golden
State. It was at a date — among a people and in a
country — when, as Judge Edward McGowan has
many times truthfully said and written, "it required
more bravery to decline than to accept a challenge."
The code was generally acknowledged, declared
Judge McGowan; "and the man in California in
those early days who refused to fight when chal-
lenged was considered outside the pale of genteel
society." A description of the fatal meeting between
Hon. Edward Gilbert (at the time editor-in-chief of
the Daily Alta California) and General James W.
Denver (then Secretary of the State of California) is
presented as one of the most dramatic and con-
spicuous affairs of this character. The Legislature
of California, at its session of 1852, had passed a bill
to provide for the sending of relief to overland im-
migrants who might be in a destitute condition, or
exposed to danger from hostile Indians. This bill
required the Governor, who had made the recommen-
dation to the Legislature, to raise a company and
supply trains sufficient to meet the necessities which

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 309

might exist during the season. The Governor had
obeyed these instructions, and had marched in front
of the train through the capital of the State as it was
setting out upon its humane expedition. Mr. Gilbert
vigorously opposed .this whole measure, frankly
stating that he believed the movement was designed
for the purpose of making political capital, and that
it would be a heavy expense to the State, and render
little aid to the immigrants. When the press an-
nounced the departure of the supply train, and com-
plimented the Governor, who escorted it out of
Sacramento, Mr. Gilbert ridiculed the parade and
show that was made about it, and intimated that the
whole thing was projected to increase the Governor's
popularity. General Denver, who was connected
with the relief train, and who was a personal friend
of Governor Bigler, replied to Mr. Gilbert's articles
by publishing a card, in which he made use of un-
mistakably discourteous language. Mr. Gilbert re-
plied, and General Denver retorted. A challenge
was immediately sent to General Denver, and ac-
cepted, and rifles selected as weapons. Mr. Gilbert
fell at the second shot and expired in less than five
minutes. The victim was a native of Albany (New
York), and was a member of the convention to form
the Constitution for the State of California, and im-
mediately after her admission into the Union was
chosen a Representative to Congress. He was only
thirty-three years of age at the time of his death, had
been a pioneer of the daily press of San Francisco,
and was an earnest if not brilliant writer. The
author has carefully perused a great many accounts
of this melancholy affair, which agree, in the main,
with the foregoing. In 1880 General Denver's name

310 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

was mentioned in connection with the Democratic
nomination for the Presidency, which prompted the
New York Herald to reproduce a description of this
episode in Denver's life, which it is presumed should
or would handicap Denver for such eminent prefer-
ment. This article was replied to by Mr. W. A.
Cornwall, of San Francisco, as follows, in a com-
munication to that paper:

The San Francisco Bulletin republished an article from
the Herald, in which General James W. Denver is men-
tioned as an eligible candidate for the Presidency. In it
reference is made to the fact that at the time Denver was
Secretary of State of California he engaged in a duel with
Edward Gilbert, who was then editor of the Alt a California.
The article is prejudicial, because it does not detail the cir-
cumstances connected with that fact and the deplorable
duel. The incident of which it was the result was an article
published in the Alta California respecting a family named
Donner, which perished en route in its attempt to emigrate
overland to California in 1850. The State, learning of the
distress of the emigrants, provided means for their relief;
and the duty of dispensing it was delegated to the Secretary
of State. This was prompt and humane, but it was bitterly
criticised and sharply assailed by Gilbert. Denver is a clear-
headed, sound man, sensitive and brave. He retorted, and
his retort was terrible. Gilbert, who was a member of
Colonel Stevenson's New York regiment, challenged Den-
ver, and the parties went upon the field. The weapons were
rifles, at short range ; and I assert, as a witness, that no man
in the tide of all the centuries ever displayed a more daunt-
less temper than Denver. He knew that Gilbert was a
brave soldier, and that he was reckoned to be a deadly shot.
Nevertheless, Denver reserved his fire, and purposely threw
away his own. Happily, Denver escaped untouched. Every
effort was then made by the seconds and by mutual friends
for peace ; Gilbert was informed that his antagonist wished

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 31 1

to clasp hands, but Gilbert refused the request in terms
which showed his friends that he had determined to kill
Denver. The principals returned to their positions.
" Now," said Denver, in a tone I shall never forget, " I
must defend myself ;" and at the word Gilbert fell, pierced
through the heart. I assert that no man more than Denver
disdains this deadly mode of arbitration, but Washington
himself would have defended his own life. He offered it,
like Denver, to his country. He would have defended it as
a trust and legacy from the Creator. He was an imperson-
ation of the great thought, Duke et decorum est pro pair id
mart.

In 1884 General Denver's name was again men-
tioned in connection with the Presidential nomina-
tion, and Judge Edward McGowan, on the lyth of
April, 1884, wrote as follows from Washington to the
San Francisco Evening Post :

In my obituary notice of the late Judge McCorkle I in-
advertently referred to the duel between General James
Denver, now a resident of this city, and Edward Gilbert,
founder of the Alta California of your city, which took
place over thirty years ago at "The Oaks," forty miles from
Sacramento. General Denver will be a candidate for Presi-
dent before the Democratic National Committee, which will
meet in Chicago on the 8th of July, and the old story of
censure, which was cast upon him by the anti-duellists and
the friends of Mr. Gilbert at the time the affair came off,
has been revived in certain circles in this city to his great
detriment, although he was not altogether to blame for the
"taking off" of Mr. 'Gilbert, as every opportunity was
afforded his friends by the friends of General Denver for a
settlement of the difficulty without a further resort to arms,
after one shot had been exchanged between the parties
without either being hit. At the time of the duel General
Denver was Secretary of State, under the administration of
the late Governor John Bigler. The meeting was caused by

312 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

a severe article in the Alfa California, an opposition press,
criticising the conduct of the Governor in appointing Gen-
eral Denver to the head of the expedition over the moun-
tains for the relief of the emigrants. This was at the time
a position of the most difficult and responsible character.
Denver replied to these strictures in the Alta in pretty severe
terms, and Mr. Gilbert, being the responsible editor, sent the
challenge. General Denver threw his first shot away — being
an expert with the rifle, although his opponent was no novice
in the use of firearms. After the first fire a proposition
was made by the friends of the challenged party to adjust
the affair. This the friends of Mr. Gilbert refused to assent
to. General Denver then threw off his coat and took his
position, making a remark to one of his friends — Dr. Wake
Brierly — about "not standing here all day to be shot at."
At the second fire Mr. Gilbert fell dead — pierced through
the heart by a bullet from his opponent's rifle. Mr. Gilbert
himself would not agree to a settlement, fearing he would
be compromised. He had had a previous difficulty with
John Nugent, editor of the San Francisco Herald, and the
affair was adjusted without resorting to the field of honor,
and it was reported that Mr. Nugent had the best of the
settlement. If this were true, it was a wrong settlement.
All adjustments of affairs of honor should be made without
casting a shadow of doubt upon the standing of either party
as a gentleman and man of courage. General Denver was
elected to Congress from California, serving in that body in
the year 1855-6. His colleague was Colonel Philemon T.
Herbert, who since received his death-wound at the battle
of Mansfield, Texas, while in command of the Seventh
Texas. Denver was also appointed. Governor of the Terri-
tory of Kansas by President James Buchanan — during
"Border Ruffian "days. His predecessors as Governors of
that Territory, during the contests of the free-State and pro-
slavery men for the supremacy in that Territory in those
bloody days of intestinal strife, were Robert J. Walker,
Edwin M. Stanton, Colonel John W. Geary, first Mayor of
San Francisco, and Wilson Shannon, afterward a resident of

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 31$

California. All of these men had wrought faithfully, in
vain, in the work of pacification, and had either thrown up
the task in despair, or had been removed by the President
for inefficiency. While Governor of Kansas, Denver held
the respect of the free-State men ; and the late Albert D.
Richardson speaks of him in his well-known work, " Beyond
the Mississippi." He says: "Though a Buchanan Demo-
crat, Denver proved more fair and just than any previous
Governor of Kansas. During the rebellion he won a Briga-
dier-Generalship in the Union service, and the thriving
metropolis of Colorado still perpetuates his name." He is
now President of the Mexican Veteran Association, and did
good service among his Congressional friends for the passing
of a bill for a pension to the Mexican veterans, which bill
the House passed this session.

John Nugent, who died in San Francisco a short
time ago, fought two duels — one in 1852, with Alder-
man Cotter in Contra Costa County, in which he was
severely wounded in the left thigh at the second shot;
and the other in 1853, near San Francisco, with Al-
derman Hayes, in which he was again severely wound-
ed at the second fire. The first duel was fought with
pistols, at ten paces, and the second with rifles, at
twenty paces. Nugent was for many years editor of
the San Francisco Daily Herald, a noted newspaper in
its day.

In 1852 W. H. Carter and Harry De Courcey, editor
of the Calaveras Chronicle, met in Yolo County with
pistols, and the latter was dangerously wounded. Mr.
James A. Avers, State Printer of California under
Governor Stoneman, in a contribution to the Sacra-
mento Bee of January i, 1884, writes of De Courcey as
follows:

Harry De Courcey was a peculiar character. A man of fine
presence and very dressy, he would be noticed in any crowd

314 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

for the remarkable likeness he bore in the shape and devel-
opment of his forehead and in his facial features to the im-
mortal bard of Avon. Harry was, however, more showy
than substantial. He was a pretty good paragraph ist, but
lacked depth of understanding and reach of thought. He
was, withal, a great spendthrift, and delighted in display and
splurge. With all his faults he was a splendid fellow and a
man of nerve. He fought a desperate duel in Washington,
Yolo county, in 1852, with one Carter, who sent his bullet
clear through De Courcey's abdomen. Fortunately, Harry's
second, Ed. Kemble, of the Alt a California, was a shrewd
manager of such affairs, and had had great experience with
the duello. When Harry asked him to act, he consented to
do so on the condition that he would throw himself entirely
into his hands. De Courcey agreed, and Kemble shut his
man up in a room. He then entered into a dilatory corre-
spondence with the opposite party, so as to gain time to get
his man in condition. Two days were consumed in sparring
between the seconds before the affair came off, and when it
did take place Carter's bullet, as before stated, made a hole
clear through De Courcey's body. When I got to the
wounded man's bedside, about two days after the affair, I
was not only astonished to find him alive after the terrible
wound he had received, but amazed to see him in jovial
spirits. I could not believe my eyes when I looked at the
ugly aperture and beheld the pleased, confident, self-satisfied
countenance of the victim. To my remark that I feared it
was all day with him, he ridiculed the idea and fairly
laughed at me. Of course I went away in the belief that he
was near his end, and that the surgeons were merely keep-
ing up his spirits with stimulants. I came over to Sacra-
mento and found Kemble. I asked him what he thought of
Harry's chances. He coolly replied that he was all right and
would get well. " But," I said, "he is shot clear through the
bowels, and a man so shot cannot live." " In most cases,"
he said, " that would be true. But in De Courcey's case it is
different." He then went on to explain that he had, during
the two days' negotiations, kept his man closely locked in

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 31$

his room, and had only allowed him a little tea and toast at
very long intervals. The result was he went on the field
with an empty stomach, and the bullet passed through be-
tween the intestines without cutting any of them. Kemble's
care saved Harry's life ; for he soon recovered, and lived for
years afterward in excellent health.

In 1854 Frank Washington (of the San Francisco
Times and Transcript) and C. A. Washburn (since
Minister to Paraguay) met with rifles, at forty paces,
and the latter was severely wounded at the second
fire. In 1851 Will Hicks Graham and S. Frank
Lemon, a San Francisco editor, met near Benicia
with pistols, and Lemon was badly wounded at the
second shot. Shortly after this affair Graham and
William Walker, the " gray-eyed man of destiny" — as
the famous filibuster was often called — (then an attache
of the San Francisco Herald} met with pistols, and
Walker was very severely and dangerously wounded.
An old Californian miner, speaking of Graham, says,
in the San Francisco Call of a late date:

Thar was true grit in that little cuss, and the biggest rough
in the Territory gave him a wide berth. As fur me, I know'd
all the time what kind of stuff he was made of. Maybe I
warn't down to 'Frisco when Hicks fought the great filibuster
Walker. He was a youngster then, working as a clerk in a
law- office near the Plazer. Walker had a newspaper, and
used ter pitch inter everybody red-hot. Nobody liked to
tackle him, for somehow or other he had got the reputation
of the gamest man that ever came to Californy. Well, one
day Walker's paper made an all-fired savage attack on an old
friend of little Graham's, who held an office there, and the
youngster went right off and writ the worst kind of a letter
to the fighting editor, calling him a coward, a liar, and
everything else. Of course, there was bound to be a fight,
and the old question about North and South got mixed up

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

in it, too. Yer see, Walker was a regular Southern fire-eater,
and the young bloods from the South rallied around him as
their champion. When it was known that little Hicks was
to fight the famous duellist, people jist smiled fur pity of the
poor young feller who was a-throwin' of his life away. But
he fit him all the same, and showed that William Walker
met his match when he met Will Hicks Graham. The duel
was talked about all over town, and a terrible big crowd
went out to see the fun. Walker was jist as game as
Graham, but he couldn't shoot worth a cent, and the end of
it was that the Pennsylvania boy shot him so bad that the
surgeon said he couldn't live an hour. But Walker pulled
through, as you all know, and afterward became a great fili-
buster. And that wasn't the only fight Hicks Graham had
in 'Frisco. Another of them editor chaps, named Frank
Lemon, got after him on the street, one day, knocked the
spunky little cuss down, and shot nearly all the teeth out
of his head. I tell ye, boys, it's a purty close call when a
feller gets yer down and then jams a pistol inter yer mouth
and teches it off. Everybody thought it was all up with
Graham that day. But he got 'round again, although badly
shot in two places. And would ye believe it, 'fore he was
half well, and while toting his left arm in a sling, Graham
challenged Lemon to a duel to the death. They fought, it
'pears to me, near Benisha, and this time the tables war
turned, and the big feller didn't have everything his own
way. Like Walker, Lemon was a brave man, but he had
met his match. By the terms of the duel, proposed and in-
sisted upon by Graham, they were to fight to the death. At
the first fire nobody was hurt, and friends tried to make it
up betwixt 'em, but 'twas no use. Both insisted on fighting,
and at the second fire Graham shot him through and
through. Dr. Hitchcock said it was all over with Frank
Lemon, and so Graham left the ground. He got well, how-
somever, after a long spell of sickness, and just as soon as he
got 'round agin Graham sent another challenge. Friends in-
terfered with better luck this time, and the trouble between
'em was patched up.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

General Walker, in later years, left California, and,
after stirring up Mexico and Central America by his
daring exploits as a filibuster, perished by the hands
of the people he had alarmed and whose country he
had invaded. Frank Lemon went East when the
civil war broke out, and died fighting gallantly for
the Union at the head of a New York regiment. As
for Graham, after a life full of excitement and adven-
ture in the wildest days of Nevada, during which he
shot Jack McBride and one or two others, he removed
to Los Angeles and died there in peace and poverty.

A correspondent of the San Francisco Evening Post,
in alluding to Walker, says of him:

" The Gray- Eyed Man of Destiny" — the greatest filibuster
of modern times — was a lawyer, and followed the profession
in several States. He also studied two other professions —
medicine and divinity. He was a Tennesseean ; small in
stature, quiet in manner, always self-possessed, and attracted
the eye chiefly by his own enormous gray orbs, which gave
him the title above. He was a born adventurer. Yet was
he gentle in speech and subdued in demeanor. His infor-
mation was wide. He frequently had personal altercations,
and fought several duels, but went into conflicts of every
kind with phenomenal composure. His habits were good,
and he was generally well liked. A mighty visionary was
he. His ambition was to effect a conquest on the Isthmus
as a nucleus for a broad dominion, to be extended into Mex-
ico and South America. In both Honduras and Nicaragua
he was a conqueror. The land was his, and the people at
his feet, but Anglo-Saxon power overthrew him. After
being driven out of Nicaragua, he repaired to New York to
devise other plans of conquest. Colonel E. C. Marshall
there met him, by chance, under the gaslight. He was en-
thusiastic over his Honduras scheme — said that it dwarfed
all his former plans. He was going to establish a great re-
public between the continents. It is believed by those who

318 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

knew him that had he succeeded in establishing his power he
would have been a wise and beneficent ruler. His political
knowledge was great. General Walker had all Europe and
half of America against him. He had not been long in Hon-
duras when the forces from a British fleet, well knowing
that Uncle Sam would interfere, captured him and turned
him over to the native Honduras authorities. He was
promptly shot. The fate of Walker was that of Henry A.
Crabbe and State Senator McCoun, two lawyers of this
State, who led an expedition into Sonora, Mexico, in 1857.
Crabbe was from Tennessee, and practised law in Stockton.
He was one term senator from San Joaquin. His name,
which was that of his father, once prominent at the Tennes-
see bar, was before the Know Nothing caucus with those of
Foote and Ferguson for United States Senator. McCoun
was in the Senate from Contra Costa County. He was a
Kentuckian. They entered Sonora with a few hundred men,
relying upon an uprising of the people against the govern-
ment. They were attacked by a force largely superior in
numbers and retreated into a church, which was set on fire
by a burning fagot attached to an arrow shot into the roof.
Compelled to march out, they were captured in a body, and
summarily and ignominiously put to death. They were
stationed in rows in front of their open graves, hands tied
behind them, and shot in the back. McCoun, on hearing the
command to fire, quickly faced about, and received his bul-
let in his breast. He was a man of commanding form and
noble spirit. Crabbe, who had a wife, a Mexican lady, in
California, was given time to write to her a letter, and he
was then beheaded.

The duel in which young Robert Tevis (brother of
Lloyd Tevis, the famous capitalist of San Francisco)
lost his life, in 1855, near Downieville, was a pecu-
liarly unfortunate affair. Tevis was a Kentuckian,
and had betrayed political aspirations from a " Know-
Nothing " standpoint. Charles E. Lippincott, a Dem-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 319

ocratic editor from Illinois, burlesqued the would-be
candidate for Congress, who published a card in
which he referred to Lippincott as a "liar and a
slanderer." The latter at once challenged Tevis,
who promptly accepted, of course, and the result
was that the two gentlemen met soon afterward
with double-barrelled shotguns, carrying ounce balls,
distance forty yards, and that at the given word both
fired at the same time, the bullet from Lippincott's
weapon going directly through his antagonist's heart,
and the survivor narrowly escaping — as was shown
by his losing a large lock of hair from the left
side of his head. Mr. Calvin B. MacDonald con-
tributed a very touching and very graphic account
of this duel to the Sacramento Record- Union in 1879,
which follows :

Some time in 1855 there came to this State a female
temperance-lecturer, Miss Sarah Pellet, a friend qf Lucy
Stone Blackwell, Antoinette Brown, and that confederation
of lady reformers. She was young, intelligent, good-look-
ing, and pure, and will be kindly remembered by many who
shall read this sketch. The writer of this was then con-
ducting the Sierra Citizen at Downieville, and Miss Pellet
having been scurrilously referred to by certain other papers,
she there found defenders, came to Downieville, and we
became fast friends. Through her exertions a large and
flourishing division of the Sons of Temperance was there
established, and all the respectable young men temporarily
stopped drinking and became enthusiastic advocates of
total abstinence. A temperance Fourth-of-July celebration
was projected, and we nominated our friend Miss Pellet to
make the oration, and, notwithstanding a strong prejudice
against women orators, succeeded in procuring her the
coveted invitation. A short time before that, Mr. Robert
Tevis-, — a promising young lawyer and a brother of Lloyd

32O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Tevis of San Francisco, — who had come there to run for Con-
gress, joined the Temperance Division, and was anxious to
make the speech in order to present himself favorably to
the public. He was hard to be put off, and was never
reconciled to the disappointment ; though to pacify his
opposition to the lady speaker he was appointed to read
the Declaration of Independence, with the privilege of
making some remarks on the illustrious document. The
glorious Fourth shone brightly on two or three thousand
people. The celebration began with a salvo of all the anvils
in town ; the primitive band blew the blast of Freedom
through patriotic brass, and Mr. Tevis, having read, began
to comment on the Declaration in a long speech, greatly to
the displeasure of the gallant Sons. In order to 'terminate
his malappropriate oration, the anvils were set to firing
with such a thundering and consecutive noise that nothing
else could be heard, and Mr. Tevis, being very angry, gave
way for the orator and sat down. The event made a great
deal of talk, and brought the ambitious young man into
very unpleasant notoriety instead of fame. The Democratic
party had procured the use of two columns of the local
paper, and had appointed as editor the Hon. Charles E.
Lippincott, State Senator from Yuba County. Lippincott
had a keen appreciation of the ludicrous, and as Tevis was
a Know Nothing, he took occasion to roast the unfortunate
young man in the Democratic corner of the paper, and it
created a great deal of fun in the town. The next day Mr.
Tevis came to me — I had no jurisdiction in the Democratic
side of the paper — and demanded the publication of a card
which pronounced the author of Lippincott's article " a liar
and a slanderer." He was white with rage and trembling,
and would not be reasoned with. Knowing the nature of
his antagonist and his deadly skill with arms, I tried to dis-
suade Tevis from the rash and dangerous publication, and
dwelt on the inevitable consequence. But he would hear
nothing ; he wanted to fight, he said, and would fight in the
street or otherwise ; and if the card was not published he
would consider it an act of hostility to himself; and so the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. $21

unconscious type gave out the fatal impress, and a challenge
from Lippincott followed promptly, and was as promptly
accepted. The difficulty took a political shape — Democrats
and Know Nothings — though some leading Democrats did
their best to prevent the meeting. Both belligerents be-
longed to the order of Odd Fellows, but as neither was a
member of the local lodge no direct authority could be im-
posed, though the good brethren kept in session all night
devising means to prevent the encounter. Several times
the difficulty was supposed to be settled, but as often it
would be renewed by certain chivalric vagabonds, who
seemed eager to see bloodshed when not flowing from their
own veins. Morning came ; the forenoon passed. The
peacemakers having been so often baffled gave up their
humane exertions, and it was understood that the fight
would come off that afternoon. In the mean time the prin-
cipals and their friends had gone to the wood, the public not
knowing when or where, and the sheriff was in pursuit.
The duelling-ground had been selected some six miles from
town, on a flat near the top of the lofty hills of Sierra
County, where never a bird sings and where the sombre fir-
trees spread their eternal pall; but when nearly ready for
their sanguinary proceedings the sheriff and his posse were
descried on a distant eminence, and the duelling-party
moved on into an adjacent county, beyond the jurisdiction
of the pursuers. There another arena was prepared, and
the great act of the tragedy was ready to come on. In the
mean while the principals had been away with their seconds
in opposite directions, practising with double-barrelled shot-
guns, loaded with ball, at forty yards, — the weapons and
distance agreed on, — and I was afterward told that each had
broken a bottle at the word. Lippincott was a low, heavy-
set man with light hair, piercing black eyes, deliberate and
resolute in his speech, and with that peculiar physical
structure indicating steadiness and self-possession. He was
the son of a clergyman in Illinois, and was exemplary in his
habits, except the ordinary drinking of that time ; was
highly cultivated in mind, and was an exceedingly good

322 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

humorous and sentimental writer. He declared he did not
wish to kill his adversary, to whom he had never spoken in
person, did not want to fight if it could be avoided, but the
nature of the public insult and the customs of the time
compelled him to send the challenge. During a previous
winter he had been engaged in hunting deer and bear, and
was known to be a remarkably good woodsman. In making
his choice of weapons, Tevis unknowingly selected those
with which his adversary was most familiar, double-
barrelled shotguns carrying ounce balls. Mr. Tevis was a
tall, spare man, of a highly nervous and excitable tempera-
ment. He came from Kentucky, and possessed the ideas of
chivalry and honor prevailing at the South, and was an ex-
cellent sporting marksman, but too little skilled in wood-
craft to know that in shooting down hill one should aim
low, else he will overreach the mark. He was possessed of
good natural abilities, but was somewhat eccentric in man-
ner, and did not possess the element of popularity. In
walking out with him on the evening before the meeting I
observed his manner was abstracted and his speech confused
and faltering as he talked of his solemn situation, but his
courage and resolution were unwavering, and he seemed
absolutely athirst to spill the blood of one who had made
him the object of mortifying ridicule. That was our last
interview, and his last night upon earth ; and the pale
ghost-like face, as it then appeared in the twilight when we
walked under the frowning hills and beside the resounding
river, hangs in memory to this day. I had seen the bound-
ing deer sink down before the aim of his iron-nerved antag-
onist, and felt then that he was a dead man walking the
lonely outskirts of the world. The combatants took their
places, forty yards apart ; the ground was a little sloping,
and the highest situation fell to the lot of Tevis. The sun
was going down upon the peace and happiness of two
families far away, and upon a brilliant young man's ambi-
tion and life. As his second walked away he turned
toward Tevis and laid his finger on his own breast, as an
indication where to aim, and Lippincott observed the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 323

gesture and fixed his eyes on the same place. The word
was given ; both guns cracked at the same instant. Tevis
sank down, shot directly through the heart, and a lock of
hair fell from near Lippincott's ear. The fallen man had
not made the necessary allowance for descending ground,
and his murderous lead had passed directly over his adver-
sary's left shoulder, grazing his face. The wound was
frightful, as though it had been bored through with an
auger, and the ground was horrible with its sanguine
libation. The survivor and his friends took their departure,
and the dead man was temporarily buried in that lonely
place, which in the gathering twilight seemed like the
chosen abode of the genius of solitude. On the following
day the body was taken up, properly enclosed, packed on a
mule to Downieville, and interred in the bleak hillside
cemetery. The funeral was very large and demonstrative,
and seemed to be a death-rite performed by the Know-
Nothing party ; and although the duel had been fair enough,
according to the murderous code, the better class of citizens
regarded Tevis as the victim of that fell and devilish spirit
which has stained the history of our State with human
blood. Lippincott fled to Nevada ; and when he afterward
returned to Downieville, he felt himself like another Ishmael.
Old friends extended their hands reluctantly, and then the
man of sensibility felt that he was overshadowed by that
voiceless, noiseless, horrible thing which made a coward of
Macbeth. Miss Pellet, regarding herself as the innocent
cause of the duel, stood courageously by her friend, visited
him in his exile, exerted all her personal influence to recon-
cile public opinion to the survivor, and behaved altogether
like a brave, true-hearted woman, as she was and still is in
her fancied mission of reform. After completing his term
in the State Senate, Mr. Lippincott returned to his home in
Illinois, to find his reverend father dying. I heard that his
son's connection with the fatal duel broke the good man's
heart, and he died. At the outbreak of the war Lippincott
joined the Union armies, distinguished himself in the battle
by his reckless daring, and became a brigadier-general.

324 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

He was afterward the Republican State Auditor of Illinois.
If this brief sketch should come to the attention of his
personal or political friends, let them know that his career
in California was distinguished and honorable ; that he was
respected and beloved by his acquaintances, and that his
unhappy entanglement in the duel resulted from his posi-
tion and the prevailing spirit of border life. At that time
a politician who would have suffered himself to be published
a liar and a slanderer, without prompt resentment, would
have been considered as disgraced by most of his fellow-
citizens. Mr. Lippincott was an intimate friend and strong
supporter of the late Senator Broderick, and was by him
regarded as his ablest advocate and partisan. Miss Pellet
went to Oregon, and there, while a gallant settler went to
pilot and protect her through the wilderness, the savages
came upon and murdered his family and burnt his house.
So did disaster seem to follow the poor girl. Afterward
she returned across the plains to the East, and I have
lately heard of her at a Woman Suffrage Convention in
Syracuse. Her Temperance Division at Downieville has
melted away ; some of her cold-water converts are dead ;
others have been separated from their families by the foul
fiend whom she almost drove from the place, and one
remains to be the brief historian of her memorable and
melancholy campaign. And so swiftly turns the whirligig
of time.

In June, 1853, Judge Stidger (editor of the Marys-
ville, Cal., Herald} and Colonel Rust (editor of the
California Express) met two miles south of Yuba City,
in Sutter County, with Mississippi yagers, at sixty
paces, and fired twice at each other without effect.
Some few years ago an eye-witness of this duel pre-
pared a very elaborate account of it for a San Fran-
cisco paper, which entitled the article "A Clash
between Northern and Southern Pluck." This ac-
count is presented:

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. $2$

In the early days of California the writer resided in the
then bustling and since beautiful city of Marysville. Of
course he witnessed many exciting scenes. There was a
vast mixture of the tragic, comic, and melodramatic, which
could be woven by a master-hand into a volume of absorbing
interest. The meeting for mortal combat between Judge
Stephen J. Field and Judge W. T. Barbour, which, with the
farcical incidents, is described by Judge Field in his valuable
little book of reminiscences; the latter judge's long and
vexatious controversy with Judge Turner; the beating of
Dr. Winters by Plummer Thurston ; the attempt to kill
Judge O. P. Stidger by Plummer Thurston, just named, and
Judge Barbour — these are but a few of this class of occur-
rences which agitated Marysville from 1850 to 1855. It is
only the writer's intention now to narrate the circumstances
of a duel between Judge Stidger and Colonel Richard Rust,
which took place in June, 1853, in Sutter County. Judge
Stidger was then one of the editors of the Marysville Herald,
a Whig paper, while Colonel Rust edited the Democratic
organ in that city, the California Express. The two gentle-
men had engaged for several days in a violent newspaper
war, during which each had called the other anything but
tender names. Judge Stidger's friends claimed that he was
victor in the war of words, because he could say more mean
things of his adversary in a minute than the latter could
think of in a day. The Judge had a peculiar way of
driving the steel home at every thrust, and his antagonist
was not able to return like for like. The consequence was
that the Judge was invited to transfer the quarrel to a field
of a different kind, that it might be settled in actual physical
encounter by the arbitrament of the bullet. He owned his
printing material, but was in debt, and John C. Fall was his
endorser. Fall was approached and asked to withdraw from
beneath Stidger his sustaining arms, and let the Herald pass
into other hands. Fall declining to do this, the fight went
on. Finally, Colonel Rust's friends prevailed upon him to
send the Judge a challenge to repair to the bloody and his-
toric field of honor. It will not be doing him any injustice,

326 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

perhaps, to say that they reasoned in this way. "Judge
Stidger was born in Ohio, and was raised to look upon duel-
ling as a crime. He won't accept a challenge, and if he does
not he will be disgraced and compelled to leave the coun-
try."

The challenge was sent, the bearers being Lee Martin and
Charles S. Fairfax, both now deceased, the party of the
second part receiving it on Friday, at the Herald office. It
was promptly accepted, Judge Stidger's reply being delivered
by Judge Gordon N. Mott, now a resident of San Francisco.
Subsequently Judge T. B. Reardon (who presided at the
second trial of Mrs. Fair, and is now practising law at
Oroville) came into the affair as a friend to the challenged
party, and performed an important part. On the day the
hostile missives passed, with commendable despatch pistols
for two and coffee for six were provided. Being the chal-
lenged party, Judge Stidger was, under the code, entitled to
dictate the kind of weapons to be used, and the distance.
He was a crack shot with the rifle. He chose Buckeye
rifles with set triggers, and fixed the distance at sixty paces.
Judge Mott and Colonel Fairfax sallied forth in search of
the needful instruments of death. They could not find any
" Buckeyes" in the city, and the only two weapons of the
kind to be had were Mississippi yagers. These would
suffice, of course, if they were of equal merit. The opposing
seconds took them out and " tried" them. One proved to
be more reliable than the other. Another could not be had.
What was to be done? The seconds determined the choice
by lot, and Fairfax won the best gun for his principal.
Judge Mott felt bad but said nothing. It was agreed
that the meeting should take place at sunrise on Sunday
(it was then late on Friday), at any place in Sutter
County selected by the seconds over five hundred yards from
the Yuba County line. On Saturday night the seconds of
Colonel Rust reported that he was severely ill, and asked a
postponement of the battle for one week, which was granted.
It was believed by Judge Stidger and his friends that this
was a ruse to get time to enable Colonel Rust to practise

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. Z27

with his weapon. Be that as it was, the parties met one
week from the time first appointed, the spot selected being
a pretty grove of native oaks, about two miles south of
Yuba City, near the public road between that " city" and the
celebrated " Hock Farm," then occupied by General Sutter.
In addition to their seconds before named, Judge Stidger
was accompanied by Dr. McDaniel, and Colonel Rust by his
brother, Dr. Rust, as surgeons. The weed's postponement
had had the effect to let out the secret, and several hundred
citizens of Marysville were anxious spectators of the solemn
scene. The distance being paced off, the choice of position
and the giving of the word were, by chance, won by the
seconds of Colonel Rust. It then looked bad for Judge
Stidger. Judge Mott said to himself, " My man is going to
get killed ; Rust has the best gun and the best standpoint."
Such was the fact, enough to inspire foreboding of evil.
Rust stood within the shade of a large oak-tree, his back to
the rising sun, which shone full in the face of Stidger. If
Colonel Rust had not been practising with his weapon
during the preceding week, he was yet familiar with its
species, while Judge Stidger never saw a Mississippi yager
until he was handed one on that portentous morning. The
writer recalls the Judge's remark upon taking his gun. He
was standing at the spot marked out for him, his base of
operations ; Dr. McDaniel was about twenty feet to his left,
the writer being near the Doctor. Judge Stidger examined
his gun carefully, and said to McDaniel : " Doc, what kind
of a gun do you call this ? I never saw one like it before."
McDaniel gave the weapon's name. " Well," continued the
Judge, " the bore can carry a half-pound ball ; if I get hit
there won't be a grease-spot left of me." Just then Judge
Mott approached and told his principal to keep cool. The
reply was : " Oh, I'm as cool as a cucumber. I chose
Buckeye rifles," continued the principal. " I never saw a
gun like this before, and I don't know how to handle it."
Judge Mott said that Buckeyes of equal calibre could not be
found, and he had done the best possible, and he explained
the circumstances. Immediately after this the parties were

328 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

instructed how to hold their guns until the word was given,
how the word would be given, and at what time to shoot,
thus: "Gentlemen, are you ready?" On both principals
responding " Aye," or " Yes," these words would follow ;
" Fire ! — one — two — three — stop !" A momentary pause
would follow each word, and the principals were to fire at
any time between the words " fire" and " stop." Fairfax
gave the instructions, after which the combatants were
placed in position. The seconds took their proper places,
and the surgeons were within conversational distance.

It was a scene that left an indelible impress on the mind of
the beholder. The harmony of nature and the antagonism
of men presented a striking contrast. The eight com-
prising the two groups were fine specimens of manly strength
and symmetry of form. Their average age was about thirty
years. The Rust party were all Southern men ; the Stidger
party comprised two Southerners — Reardon and McDaniel
— while Judges Stidger and Mott were from Ohio. They
stood beneath the tattered banner of a -code which was
hoary with age and had reached the last decade of its sway
in American States. Cut bono? Being near to Judge
Stidger's position and some sixty yards from Colonel Rust,
I saw more of the former and necessarily write more con-
cerning his action. I can say of Colonel Rust, however,
that his bearing was brave and resolute. The word came,
" Gentlemen, are you ready ?" Judge Stidger responded in
a loud tone, " Aye." Immediately afterward followed (I
did not catch Colonel Rust's response) " Fire ! — one — two —
three — stop !" At the word " two," slang-bang went both
guns. Stidger's shot passed high over the head of Rust;
the latter's lodged in Stidger's coat-tail pocket, riddling a
handkerchief. [It was a happy circumstance that the hand-
kerchief caused the tail of the coat to bulge out, as it
enabled a punster to exclaim with delight that the pocket
was "rifled."] "Are you hurt?" inquired Dr. McDaniel,
approaching his principal, desiring to know if his services
were needed. " Hurt ? No," was the answer. " Examine
your pockets," said the Doctor. The Judge did so, and re-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 329

marked " That was a pretty clever shot." "Yes," replied
the Doctor, " and now there must be no more foolishness.
You must kill him, or he will kill you." To this the Judge
answered, " I do not want to kill him. I don't want his
blood on my hands. He has a family to maintain, and I
don't want to rob them of their support." " That may be all
very fine in theory," said the Doctor, " but the fact is before
you that he is trying to kill you, and, to prevent it, you must
kill him. You can do it, if you will."

Judges Mott and Reardon now came up, and said that
Rust demanded another shot. " Very well, I am willing,"
said Judge Stidger. The latter was then told by Judge
Reardon that he (Reardon) would leave the field unless he
(Stidger) promised to shoot at Rust. The Judge promised.
Judge Mott then informed him that his position at the first
fire was awkward, and he must stand erect ; that if he con-
tinued to present so many angles to the enemy he was liable
to get hurt. This admonition had good and immediate
effect. Stidger thereafter stood straight as an arrow, and at
the same time bore himself with perfect ease. The seconds
having retired to load the guns for the second fire, Judge
Stidger said to Dr. McDaniel, " I promised to shoot at
Colonel Rust, but I did not promise to kill him, and I
won't." The Doctor said, " You must kill him, or he will
kill you. Your gun carries up. Shoot for his legs and you
will hit him in the body. The gun is good for three hun-
dred yards, but at short range it carries up." Finally Judge
Stidger said, " Well, Doc, I'll wing him. I will shoot for
his arm. I'll cripple him, and then he can't shoot again."
" Yes," answered the Doctor, " that would do if you had a
guaranty of your own life. Supposing, while you are shoot-
ing for his arm, his ball should hit you in a vital place, what
then ?" " Oh," said the Judge, " if he should kill me, that
would be the end of it."

The Judge was now handed his gun and placed in position
for the second fire, with directions to " keep cool and shoot
him." The word was given. As before, both guns went off
simultaneously. My eyes were intently directed to Judge

330 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Stidger, for I expected to see him fall. After the word
" stop !" he held his gun to his shoulder, and earnestly eyed
his adversary as though about to shoot. This action was
so interpreted by Colonel Rust's seconds, who called out,
" Stop ! stop !" The fact was that, owing to both guns being
fired at the same instant, the seconds of Rust did not know
if Stidger had fired or not. On hearing the words " stop !
stop!" Stidger threw his gun upon the ground and said,
" Doc, this gun ain't worth a damn. I don't believe a man
could hit a barn-door with it at a distance of six feet. I had
a splendid shot at his arm, and I got a pretty good sight
along the barrel. If the gun had been worth a damn I
would have struck his elbow." The Doctor asked, " Why
didn't you shoot at his body ? I told you the gun carried
up." " If I had done that," said the Judge. " I would have
killed him, and I didn't want to do that." ' Well," said the
Doctor, " if he demands another shot what will you do ?"
" I will kill him," was the answer ; " I have now given him
two fair shots at me. I could have killed him if I had de-
sired to do so. I spared his life because of his family, and
because I did not want his blood on my hands. Now, if he
isn't satisfied I'll kill him. I don't want to do it. but if 1
must shoot again 1 will end it." To this the Doctor replied,
" Now you are talking right." The seconds again came up
and reported that Colonel Rust demanded another shot, and
wanted the distance reduced before the next fire. Judge
Stidger replied that his gun was no account at sixty paces ;
he thought if the distance was doubled he would fire better.
" Gentlemen," said he to his seconds, " I am in your hands.
Whatever you say I must do I will do. I only ask you to
protect my honor." Judge Reardon replied, " That we will
do." Judges Mott and Reardon then took the gun and left,
and met the opposing seconds on neutral ground. The four
men, after guns were again loaded, appeared to be in earnest
consultation. The while the Judge was pacing back and
forth, talking with his physician. The Judge had got
warmed up, and was chafing. McDaniel advised him to
keep cool. "Oh, don't you fear, Doc," said the Judge. "I

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. . 331

will be cool enough to kill that fellow, if he forces me to do
it." Several minutes passed — seeming to the writer " a vast
half-hour" — when one of the seconds fired off a gun, which
was a signal that some arrangement had been made putting
an end to the affair. Judge Stidger's seconds coming back
and verifying the " report" of the gun, he asked, " How ?
On what terms?" Judge Reardon answered, "Honorably
to you. I drew up the stipulations and saw to it that you
are not compromised. The terms are honorable to both
parties, and I am to hold the documents." All the parties
then left the field for the city.

Some time after the duel it was stated that Judge Stidger's
second shot cut Colonel Rust's hair just above his ear, and
that this it was that caused the Colonel's seconds to make
peace. Whether true or not the writer could not learn to
his satisfaction. He has often talked with Colonel Fairfax
about this duel. He (Fairfax) stated that he had witnessed
many meetings of the kind in the South, where he was born
and reared, but had never seen two men stand up more
manfully to their work than those engaged in this affair.
He spoke in glowing terms of Judge Stidger on that occa-
sion, for, he said, he expected to see him wilt, being a North-
ern man, unacquainted with the code duello. " People
needn't tell me," he said, " that men born in the North are
cowards. I know better. It won't do to fool with such
men. They have pluck and will die game."

In 1851 A. C. Russell, a San Francisco journalist,
met Captain J. L. Folsom, and exchanged two shots
without harm to either, when Captain Marcy, one of
the seconds, brought about a settlement of the af-
fair. Later Russell fought a bloodless duel with
Governor McDougal. In 1851 E. C. Kemble (an
editor of the Alta California) and Colonel McDougal
went out to meet each other in mortal combat, but
were arrested on the field. In 1870, at Los Angeles,
Captain Charles E. Beane, an ex-Confederate officer,

332 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

and John Wilson, son of Hon. Benjamin D. Wilson,
one of the noblest of Californians, met with pistols,
and Wilson was wounded in the arm at the first fire.
Charles E. Beane died a few years ago in Los An-
geles, beloved by all who knew him well. A native
of Maine, he had drifted down into the sunny South
at the age of nineteen, and had found his way into
the Confederate army at the age of twenty — like hun-
dreds of other Northern boys — in which he gallantly
fought until the close of the war. In 1850 W. H.
Carter and William Walker (both editors) met near
San Francisco, and the latter was slightly wounded.

In June, 1842, General James Watson Webb (editor
of the New York Courier and Enquirer) and Hon.
Thomas F. Marshall, of Kentucky, met with pistols,
in Delaware, and the former was wounded. In No-
vember General Webb was brought to trial in New
York for leaving the State with the intention of giv-
ing or receiving a challenge, pleaded guilty, and was
sentenced to two years' imprisonment at Sing Sing,
but received a pardon from Governor Seward in a
day or two after the sentence. In 1849, in Arkansas,
W. E. Gibson met C. Irving, editor of the Memphis
Inquirer, and the latter was dangerously wounded at
the first fire. In 1851 Colonel Smythe, an attache of
the Augusta (Ga.) Constitutionalist, and Dr. Thomas, a
leading physician of Augusta, met near the South
Carolina line with pistols, and the editor was dan-
gerously wounded at the third shot. In 1832 Mr.
Bynum, editor of the Greenville (North Carolina)
Sentinel, and Mr. Perry, of the Greenville Mountaineer
quarrelled for a long time, and then met with pistols,
and at the first shot Bynum fell mortally wounded.
In June, 1869, Sefior Jose Ferrer de Canto, editor of

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 333

the New York Cronista, and Sefior Francisco Porto,
editor of La Revolution, became involved in a serious
quarrel over the affairs growing out of the rebellion
in Cuba at that time, and met at Lundy's Lane
(Canada), with pistols, when Sefior Porto received his
adversary's bullet through both legs at the first fire.
On the 8th of January, 1876, James Gordon Bennett,
Jr., of the New York Herald, and Fred May, of New
York, fought a duel, without serious consequences, in
Delaware. In 1859 Mr. Cross, of a St. Louis paper,
and Lieutenant Sylvester L. Mowry, U. S. A., met
near Tubac (Arizona) with pistols, but there was no
casualty. In 1866 Joseph T. Goodman (then editor
of the Virginia City Enterprise and now editor of the
San Franciscan) and Hon. Thomas Fitch met near
Virginia City (Nevada) with pistols, and the latter
was slightly wounded.

334 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XVII.
NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

The Hostile Meeting of Hamilton and Burr — The Most Famous
Duel known in History — Hamilton's Opinion of Burr — Corre-
spondence between the Illustrious Parties — Termination of
Direct Correspondence — New Correspondence — Burr's Chal-
lenge to Hamilton — The Challenge Accepted — Hamilton's
"Remarks" on Duelling and hfs Will — The Fatal Affair —
Details of the Duel as furnished by the Seconds — Dr.
Hosack's Pathetic Story — "Remember, my Eliza, you are a
Christian " — Sabine's Impressions — Description of the Wea-
pons used — The Old Hamilton Homestead — Hamilton's
Grave in Trinity Churchyard — Hamilton's Birth and Child-
hood— His Early Work and Ambition — His General Career —
His Marriage — His Military and Financial Achievements — " He
Smote the Rock of the National Resources and Abundant
Streams of Revenue Gushed Forth" — The Career of Aaron
Burr — From a Private Soldier of the Revolution to Vice-
President of the United States — His First Marriage — His
Arrest for High Treason — " Not Guilty under the Indictment
by any Evidence submitted" — Chief-Justice Marshall's Absence
of Personal Feeling One of the Marvels of Legal History —
The Remarkable Man (Burr) as Described by Ben Parley
Poore — The Recollections of a Lady who felt the Power and
Fascination of Burr's Eyes.

INSEPARABLY connected with the political history of
the United States — above all other kindred events —
is that memorable meeting of Alexander Hamilton
and Aaron Burr at Weehawken (New Jersey) oppo-
site the city of New York, on Wednesday morning,
about seven o'clock, July n, 1804, in which the former

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 335

received his antagonist's bullet in a vital part, and
from which he died at two o'clock Thursday afternoon.
No event of the kind — so far as can be discovered by
the author — in America, or elsewhere, ever produced
such a general and profound sensation. The intelli-
gence of the fall of the illustrious Hamilton, while it
was received with marked feeling in Europe, even,
fell like a crushing dome upon the American people.
New York City was paralyzed, and the inhabitants of
the whole country were plunged into the deepest
mourning. Great multitudes of people thronged to
New York to witness the melancholy ceremonies, and
to take part in the funeral procession — which was
very large and very impressive. This took place on
Saturday, July 14. The funeral address was deliv-
ered by Gouverneur Morris, from a platform in front
of Trinity Church, Broadway, in the presence of
many thousands of grief-stricken people, among
whom were four of the sons of the deceased, the
eldest of whom was sixteen and the youngest between
six and seven.

As early as 1790 — fourteen years previous to the
tragic encounter — Hamilton and Burr were politi-
cally in each other's way. Both were eminent as
builders of the republic in which we live, and both
were renowned for their gallantry and patriotism as
soldiers and citizens. Both were recognized as
leaders in the parties they represented — Hamilton of
the organization known as the Federalists, and Burr
of that great and growing element called Democracy.
The one political party represented the more elevated
and intelligent classes of the American people at
that time, and the other those elements which, in
later years, until 1860, almost continuously ruled the

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

country. Hamilton had been the bosom-friend of
Washington, and Burr the unsustained head and
front of the Jeffersonian plan. One had held the posi-
tions, among others, of Secretary of the Treasury and
General of the Army, and the other occupied the
chair of the Vice-President of the United States.
Both aspired to the position of Chief Magistrate of
the Nation. In their ambitions they were alike — in
nothing else were they alike, unless it might have
been in their personal weaknesses. No Americans
have lived since who have been just like either of
them in all things.

It is not strange, then, that Hamilton wrote of
Burr as follows, in 1792: " Burr's integrity as an in-
dividual is not unimpeached. As a public man he is
one of the worst sort — a friend to nothing but as suits
his interest and ambition. Determined to climb to
the highest honors of the State, and as much higher as
circumstances may permit, he cares nothing about the
means of effecting his purpose. 'Tis evident that he
aims at putting himself at the head of what he calls
the popular party as affording the best tools for an am-
bitious man to work with. Secretly turning liberty
into ridicule, he knows as well as most men how to
make use of the name. In a word, if we have an
embryo Ccesar in the United States, 'tis Burr /"

From this time up to the year of the fatal meeting
Hamilton's verbal and written allusions to Burr were
hostile and frequent. At last, while expressing an
opinion of Burr in the presence of Dr. Charles D.
Cooper, Hamilton (so it was alleged by Cooper) de-
clared that he " looked upon Mr. Burr as a dangerous
man, and one who ought not to be trusted with the
reins of government."

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 337

This declaration, which first met the eye of Burr in
a published letter, so incensed the latter that, on the
i8th of June, 1804, he sent Hamilton a note by hand
of W. P. Van Ness, which was as follows:

SIR : I send for your perusal a letter signed Charles D.
Cooper, which, though apparently published some time ago,
has but very recently come to my knowledge. Mr. Van
Ness, who does me the favor to deliver this, will point out to
you that clause of the letter to which I particularly request
your attention.

You must perceive, sir, the necessity of a prompt and un-
qualified acknowledgment or denial of the use of any ex-
pression which would warrant the assertions of Dr. Cooper.

To this letter Hamilton replied on the 2oth of the
same month, as follows:

SIR : I have maturely reflected on the subject of your
letter of the i8th inst., and the more I have reflected, the
more I have become convinced that I could not, without
manifest impropriety, make the avowal or disavowal which
you seem to think necessary. The clause pointed out by
Mr. Van Ness is in these terms : " I could detail to
you a still more despicable opinion which General Ham-
ilton has expressed of Mr. Burr." To endeavor to dis-
cover the meaning of this declaration, I was obliged to
seek in the antecedent part of this letter for the opinion
to which it referred, as having been already disclosed.
I found it in these words : " General Hamilton and Judge
Kent have declared in substance that they looked upon Mr.
Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not to be
trusted with the reins of government"

The language of Dr. Cooper plainly implies that he consid-
ered this opinion of you which he attributes to me as a despic-
able one ; but he affirms that I have expressed some other,
more despicable, without, however, mentioning to whom,
when, or where. Tis evident that the phrase, " still more
despicable," admits of infinite shades, from very light to

338 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

very dark. How am I to judge of the degree intended ? or
how shall I annex any precise idea to language so indefi-
nite ? Between gentlemen, despicable and more despicable
are not worth the pains of distinction ; when, therefore, you
do not interrogate me as to the opinion which is specifically
ascribed to me, I must conclude that you view it as within
the limits to which the animadversions of political oppo-
nents upon each other may justifiably extend, and conse-
quently as not warranting the idea of it which Dr. Cooper
appears to entertain. If so, what precise inference could
you draw, as a guide for your conduct, were I to acknowledge
that I had expressed an opinion of you still more despicable
than the one which is particularized ? How could you be
sure that even this opinion had exceeded the bounds which
you would yourself deem admissible between political
opponents ?

But I forbear further comment on the embarrassment to
which the requisition you have made naturally leads. The
occasion forbids a more ample illustration, though nothing
could be more easy than to pursue it.

Repeating that I cannot reconcile it with propriety to
make the acknowledgment or denial you desire, I will add
that I deem it inadmissible on principle to consent to be
interrogated as to the justness of the inferences which may
be drawn by others from whatever I may have said of a
political opponent, in the course of fifteen years' competi-
tion. If there were no other objection to it, this is suffi-
cient, that it would tend to expose my sincerity and deli-
cacy to injurious imputations from every person who may
at any time have conceived the import of my expressions
differently from what I may then have intended, or may
afterwards recollect. I stand ready to avow or disavow,
Promptly and explicitly, any precise or definite opinion which I
may be charged with having declared of any gentleman.
More than this cannot fitly be expected from me, and
especially it cannot be reasonably expected that I shall enter
into an explanation upon a basis so vague as that which you
have adopted. I trust on more reflection you will see the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 339

matter in the same light with me. If not, I can only regret
the circumstance and must abide the consequences.

The publication of Dr. Cooper was never seen by me till
after the receipt of your letter.

Burr again addressed Hamilton, as follows, on the
2ist:

SIR: Your letter of the 26th instant has been this day
received. Having considered it attentively, I regret to find
in it nothing of that sincerity and delicacy which you pro-
fess to value.

. Political opposition can never absolve gentlemen from the
necessity of a rigid adherence to the laws of honor and the
rules of decorum. I neither claim such privilege nor indulge
it in others.

The common-sense of mankind affixes to the epithet
adopted by Dr. Cooper the idea of dishonor. It has been
publicly applied to me under the sanction of your name.
The question is not, whether he has understood the meaning
of the word, or has used it according to syntax, and with
grammatical accuracy: but, whether you have authorized
this application, either directly or by uttering expressions
or opinions derogatory to my honor. The time " when"
is in your own knowledge, but no way material to me, as
the calumny has now first been disclosed, so as to become
the subject of my notice, and as the effect is present and
palpable.

Your letter has furnished me with new reasons for requir-
ing a definite reply.

This letter was answered by Hamilton on June 22,
the following day, thus:

SIR : Your first letter, in a style too peremptory, made a
demand, in my opinion, unprecedented and unwarrantable.
My answer, pointing out the embarrassment, gave you an
opportunity to take a less exceptionable course. You have
not chosen to do it; but by your last letter, received this

340 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

day, containing expressions indecorous and improper, you
have increased the difficulties to explanation intrinsically
incident to the nature of your application.

If by a "definite reply" you mean the direct avowal or dis-
avowal required in your first letter, I have no other answer
to give than that which has already been given. If you
mean anything different, admitting of greater latitude, it is
requisite you should explain.

This terminated the direct correspondence between
the principals ; which, while brief, discloses charac-
teristics of the distinguished parties which tend to
suddenly elevate Hamilton in the esteem and admira-
tion of most unprejudiced minds. The attitude of
Hamilton toward Burr, up to the time of Burr's let-
ter of the 1 8th of June, was less noble than that
of his illustrious rival. He had publicly denounced
Burr as unpatriotic, unsafe, and unprincipled, in
many places and at many times during fifteen years,
and had never lost an opportunity of privately be-
smirching Burr's character. Besides, Hamilton had
vindictively opposed Thomas Jefferson, the leader of
the Democracy, and had at the same time intrigued
against John Adams, the candidate for President of
his own organization. He had violated the confi-
dence reposed in him by Washington (so it has been
alleged) by preserving the draft of the Farewell
Address, which he (Hamilton) had written ; and he
was undoubtedly the "power behind the throne"
during Adams's administration. Indeed, when his
despotic career, his malevolent designs, and his arro-
gant and ambitious projects are all taken into un-
impassioned consideration, Hamilton looms up as
certainly the more dangerous man of the two, not-
withstanding his long-continued and exasperating at-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 34 l

tempts to dispossess Burr of any hold he may have
had upon the affections of the American people.
But the conciliatory, even if somewhat evasive, tone
of his answers to the two direct letters of Burr —
which bristled all over with predetermined hostility
— suddenly arrests the growing sympathy one feels
for the oft-maligned soldier and patriot ; and, as we
continue to pursue the matter to its tragic and un-
fortunate end — embracing Hamilton's will and his
remarks explanatory of his conduct, his determina-
tion to reserve his fire, and the emotional circumstan-
ces of his death, to say nothing of the almost fiendish
nature of his antagonist's course from the moment
that he seemed to be prompted to adopt extreme
measures until the meeting and its fatal consequen-
ces— we lose sight altogether of the vices of Hamil-
ton and the virtues of Burr, and canonize the mem-
ory of the one while we shudder at the name of the
other.

On the 26th of June a new correspondence was
opened between Messrs. W. P. Van Ness and Nathan-
iel Pendleton by the former, who, in the course of
his letter, declared that " Colonel Burr could see no
disposition on the part of General Hamilton to come
to a satisfactory accommodation ;" and concluded by
saying: "lam consequently again instructed to de-
liver you a message as soon as it may be convenient
for you to receive it," etc. Mr. Pendleton replied at
once that he had placed the letter from Mr. Van
Ness before General Hamilton, who objected to
Colonel Burr's greatly extended ground of inquiry,
which seemed to be nothing less than an inquisition
into his most confidential conversations, as well as
others, through the whole period of his acquaintance

342 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

with Colonel Burr. Mr. Pendleton's letter concluded
as follows:

While he was prepared to meet the particular case fairly
and fully, he thinks it inadmissible that he should be ex-
pected to answer at large as to everything that he may
possibly have said, in relation to the character of Colonel
Burr, at any time or upon any occasion. Though he is not
conscious that any charges which are in circulation to the
prejudice of Colonel Burr have originated with him — ex-
cept one which may have been so considered, and which
has long since been fully explained between Colonel Burr
and himself — yet he cannot consent to be questioned general-
ly as to any rumors which may be afloat derogatory to the
character of Colonel Burr, without specification of the sev-
eral rumors, many of them probably unknown to him. He
does not, however, mean to authorize any conclusion as to
the real nature of his conduct in relation to Colonel Burr,
by his declining so loose and vague a basis of explanation,
and he disavows an unwillingness to come to a satisfactory,
provided it be an honorable, accommodation. His objec-
tion is, the very indefinite ground which Colonel Burr has
assumed, in which he is sorry to be able to discern nothing
short of predetermined hostility. Presuming, therefore,
that it will be adhered to, he has instructed me to receive
the message which you have it in charge to deliver. For
this purpose I shall be at home and at your command
to-morrow morning from eight to ten o'clock.

On the 2yth Mr. Van Ness addressed Mr. Pendle-
ton for the last time, and enclosed with the letter a
formal challenge, as follows:

SIR : The letter which I had the honor to receive from
you, under date of yesterday, states, among other things,
that, in General Hamilton's opinion, Colonel Burr has taken
a very indefinite ground, in which he evinces nothing short
of predetermined hostility, and that General Hamilton
thinks it inadmissible that the inquiry should extend to his

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 343

confidential as well as other conversations. In this Colonel
Burr can only reply, that secret whispers traducing his fame,
and impeaching his honor, are at least equally injurious
with slanders publicly uttered ; that General Hamilton had
at no time, and in no place, a right to use any such injurious
expressions ; and that the partial negative he is disposed to
give, with the reservations he wishes to make, are proofs
that he has done the injury specified.

Colonel Burr's request was, in the first instance, proposed
in a form the most simple, in order that General Hamilton
might give to the affair that course to which he might be
induced by his temper and his knowledge of facts. Colonel
Burr trusted with confidence that, from the frankness of a
soldier and the candor of a gentleman, he mrght expect an
ingenuous declaration. That if, as he had reason to believe,
General Hamilton had used expressions derogatory to his
honor, he would have had the magnanimity to retract them ;
and that if, from his language, injurious inferences had been
improperly drawn, he would have perceived the propriety of
correcting errors which might thus have been widely dif-
fused. With these impressions Colonel Burr was greatly
surprised at receiving a letter which he considered as evas-
ive, and which in manner he deemed not altogether deco-
rous. In one expectation, however, he was not wholly de-
ceived, for the close of General Hamilton's letter contained
an intimation that if Colonel Burr should dislike his refusal
to acknowledge . or deny, he was ready to meet the conse-
quences. This Colonel Burr deemed a sort of defiance, and
would have felt justified in making it the basis of an imme-
diate message. But as the communication contained some-
thing concerning the indefiniteness of the request, as he
believed it rather the offspring of false pride than of reflec-
tion, and as he felt the utmost reluctance to proceed to ex-
tremities while any other hope remained, his request was
repeated in terms more explicit. The replies and proposi-
tions on the part of General Hamilton have, in Colonel
Burr's opinion, been constantly in substance the same.

Colonel Burr disavows all motives of predetermined hos-

344 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

tility, a charge by which he thinks insult added to injury.
He feels as a gentleman should feel when his honor is im-
peached or assailed ; and without sensations of hostility or
wishes of revenge, he is determined to vindicate that honor
at such hazard as the nature of the case demands.

The length to which this correspondence has extended
only tending to prove that the satisfactory redress, earnestly
desired, cannot be obtained, he deems it useless to offer
any proposition except the simple message which I shall
now have the honor to deliver.

Mr. Pendleton accepted the challenge, as was his
only course, it would seem. Still, Hamilton un-
doubtedly hoped that a meeting might be averted,
and so prepared the following observations on Mr.
Van Ness's last letter :

Whether the observations on this letter are designed
merely to justify the result which is indicated in the close
of the letter, or may be intended to give an opening for
rendering anything explicit which may have been deemed
vague heretofore, can only be judged of by the sequel. At
any rate, it appears to me necessary not to be misunder-
stood. Mr. Pendleton is therefore authorized to say, that
in the course of the present discussion, written or verbal,
there has been no intention to evade, defy, or insult, but a
sincere disposition to avoid extremities if it could be done
with propriety. With this view General Hamilton has been
ready to enter into a frank and free explanation on any and
every object of a specific nature ; but not to answer a gen-
eral and abstract inquiry, embracing a period too long for
any accurate recollection, and exposing him to unpleasant
criticisms from, or unpleasant discussions with, any and
every person who may have understood him in an unfavor-
able sense. This (admitting that he could answer in a man-
ner the most satisfactory to Colonel Burr), he should deem
inadmissible in principle and precedent, and" humiliating in
practice. To this, therefore, he can never ^ubmit. Fre-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 345

quent allusion has been made to slanders, said to be in cir-
culation. Whether they are openly or in whispers, they
have a form and shape, and might be specified. If the
alternative alluded to in the close of the letter is definitely
tendered, it must be accepted, the time, place, and manner
to be afterward regulated.

This paper was proffered to Mr. Van Ness by Mr.
Pendleton, but the former barbarously and disdain-
fully declined to receive any further correspondence,
remarks, or explanations from either General Hamil-
ton or his friend, on the ground that the acceptance
of the challenge had precluded the possibility of any
additional attempts at reconciliation or settlement.
Preparations for the duel were then made by General
Hamilton, who wrote a letter on the 5th of July to be
given his wife, in case of his fall, and executed his
will on the 9th, leaving his entire property, after the
payment of all his debts, to his wife. On the even-
ing before the duel General Hamilton prepared a
paper containing his opinions of duelling, and ex-
pressive of the reluctance with which he obeyed a
custom so repugnant to his feelings, in which he
said:

On my expected interview with Colonel Burr, I think
proper to make some remarks explanatory of my conduct,
motives, and views. I was certainly desirous of avoiding
this interview for the most cogent of reasons.

First — My religious and moral principles are strongly op-
posed to the practice of duelling ; and it would ever give
me pain to shed the blood of a-fellow creature in a private
combat forbidden by the laws.

mSecondly — My wife and children are extremely dear to me,
and my life is of the utmost importance to them in various
views.

Thirdly — I feel a sense of obligation toward my creditors,

34-6 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

who, in case of accident to me, by the forced sale of my
property, may be in some degree sufferers. I did not think
myself at liberty, as a man of probity, lightly to expose them
to hazard.

Fourthly — I am conscious of no ill-will to Colonel Burr
distinct from political opposition, which, as I trust, has pro-
ceeded from pure and upright motives.

Lastly — I shall hazard much, and can possibly gain
nothing, by the issue of the interview.

But it was, as I conceive, impossible for me to avoid it.
There were intrinsic difficulties in the thing, and artificial
embarrassments from the manner of proceeding on the part
of Colonel Burr. Intrinsic, because it is not to be denied
that my animadversions on the political principles, charac-
ter, and views of Colonel Burr have been extremely severe ;
and on different occasions I, in common with many others,
have made very unfavorable criticisms on particular in-
stances of the private conduct of this gentleman. In pro-
portion as these impressions were entertained with sincerity
and uttered with motives and for purposes which might ap-
pear to me commendable, would be the difficulty (until they
could be removed by evidence of their being erroneous) of
explanation or apology. The disavowal required of me by
Colonel Burr, in a general and indefinite form, was out of
my power, if it had really been proper for me to submit to
be so questioned ; but I was sincerely of opinion that this
could not be, and in this opinion I was confirmed by that of
a very moderate and judicious friend whom I consulted.
Besides that, Colonel Burr appeared to me to assume, in
the first instance, a tone unnecessarily peremptory and
menacing, and, in the second, positively offensive. Yet I
wished, as far as might be practicable, to leave a door open
to accommodation. This, I think, will be inferred from the
written communications made by me and by my direction,
and would be confirmed by the conversations between Mr.
Van Ness and myself which arose out of the subject. I am
not sure whether, under all the circumstances, I did not go
further in the attempt to accommodate than a punctilious

ATOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 347

delicacy will justify. If so, I hope the motives I have stated
will excuse me. It is not my design, by what I have said,
to affix any odium on the conduct of Colonel Burr in this
case. He doubtless has heard of animadversions of mine
which bore very hard upon him ; and it is probable that, as
usual, they were accompanied with some falsehoods. He
may have supposed himself under a necessity of acting as he
has done. I hope the grounds of his proceeding have been
such as ought to satisfy his own conscience. I trust, at the
same time, that the world will do me the justice to believe
that I have not censured him on light grounds, nor from
unworthy inducements. I certainly have had strong rea-
sons for what I may have said, though it is possible that in
some particulars I may have been influenced by miscon-
struction and misinformation. It is also my ardent wish
that I may have been more mistaken than I think I have
been, and that he, by his future conduct, may show himself
worthy of all confidence and esteem, and prove an ornament
and blessing to the country. As well because it is possible
that I may have injured Colonel Burr, however convinced
myself that my opinions and declarations have been well
founded, as from my general principles and temper in rela-
tion to similar affairs, I have resolved, if our interview is
conducted in the usual manner, and it pleases God to give
me the opportunity, to reserve and throw away my first
fire, and I have thoughts even of reserving my second fire, and
thus giving a double opportunity to Colonel Burr to pause and
reflect. It is not, however, my intention to enter into any
explanations on the ground. Apology, from principle, I
hope, rather than pride, is out of the question. To those
who, with me, abhorring the practice of duelling, may think
that I ought on no account to have added to the number of
bad examples, I answer that my relative situation, as well in
public as private, enforcing all the considerations which
constitute what men of the world denominate honor, im-
posed on me (as I thought) a peculiar necessity not to de-
cline the call. The ability to be in future useful, whether in
resisting mischief or effecting good, in those crises of our

34-8 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

public affairs which seem likely to happen, would probably
be inseparable from a conformity with public prejudice in
this particular.

As has been stated, the duel took place on the nth
of July, 1804, the particulars of which have gone into
history on the strength of the statements made by
the seconds of the parties — Mr. William P. Van Ness
on the part of Burr, and Colonel Nathaniel Pendleton
on that of Hamilton. The place selected for the
scene of the duel was a little secluded ledge beneath
the heights of Weehawken, and not far above the level
of the Hudson. It was the very spot where Philip
Hamilton (the eldest son of Alexander Hamilton)
had fallen about three years before. The parties
went up the stream by boat from New York, Burr
and his friends arriving first, by special arrangement.
The parties being placed, the word was given, when
Hamilton, raising himself convulsively, fell forward
on his face, his pistol being discharged as he sank to
the ground, sending the ball whizzing through the
foliage of the surrounding trees. Van Ness and Burr
immediately hurried to their boat. Colonel Pendle-
ton and Dr. Hosack, who were in attendance, raised
Hamilton into a sitting posture, when it was dis-
covered that he had been struck in the right side.
He was just able to articulate, " This is a mortal
wound, "when he fell into a swoon. As he. was car-
ried gently to the river-bank, he opened his eyes for
a moment and said, " My vision is indistinct."
Later General Hamilton declared that he had met
Colonel Burr with a fixed resolution to do him no
harm, and that he forgave all that had happened.
He lingered during the remainder of that day, and

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. . 349

the night following, but died at two o'clock on the
afternoon of the next day.

The details of the duel, as furnished by the
seconds, Messrs. Van Ness and Pendleton, are as
follows :

Colonel Burr arrived first on the ground, as had been pre-
viously agreed. When General Hamilton arrived the
parties exchanged salutations and the seconds proceeded to
make their arrangements. They measured the distance,
ten full paces, and cast lots for the choice of position, as
also to determine by whom the word should be given, both
of which fell to the seconds of General Hamilton. They
then proceeded to load the pistols in each other's presence,
after which the parties took their stations. The gentleman
who was to give the word then explained to the parties the
rules which were to govern them in firing, which were as
follows : The parties being placed at their stations, the sec-
ond who gives the word shall ask them whether they are
ready; being answered in the affirmative, he shall say
" Present;" after this the parties shall present and fire when
they please. If one fires before the other, the opposite
second shall say, " One, two, three, fire," and he shall then
fire or lose his fire. He then asked if they were prepared ;
being answered in the affirmative, he gave the word,
Present, as had been agreed on, and both parties presented
and fired in succession — the intervening time is not ex-
pressed, as the seconds do not precisely agree on that point.
The fire of Colonel Burr took effect, and General Hamilton
almost instantly fell. Colonel Burr then advanced toward
General Hamilton, with a manner and gesture that appeared
to General's Hamilton's friend to be expressive of regret,
but without speaking turned about and withdrew, being
urged from the field by his friend with a view to prevent his
being recognized by the surgeon and bargemen, who were
then approaching. No further communication took place
between the principals, and the barge that carried Colonel
Burr immediately returned to the city. We conceive it

35° THE FIELD OF HONOR.

proper to add that the conduct of the parties in this inter-
view was perfectly proper as suited the occasion.

Dr. Hosack then tells how Pendleton and himself
carried the wounded man to their boat; and, upon
their arrival at the wharf, how they conveyed him as
tenderly as possible up to Hamilton's residence.
"The distresses of his amiable family," says the
Doctor, " were such that, till the first shock was
abated, they were scarcely able to summon fortitude
enough to yield sufficient assistance to their dying
friend. Upon our reaching the house he became
more languid, occasioned, probably, by the agitation
of his removal from the boat. I gave him a little
weak wine and water. When he recovered his feel-
ings, he complained of pain in his back. We im-
mediately undressed him and laid him in bed, and
darkened the room. I then gave him a large ano-
dyne, which I frequently repeated. During the first
day he took upward of an ounce of laudanum; and
tepid anodyne fomentations were also applied to
those parts nearest the seat of his pain. Yet were
his sufferings, during the whole of the day, almost
intolerable. I had not the shadow of a hope of his
recovery, and Dr. Post, whom I requested might be
sent for immediately on our reaching Mr. Bayard's
house, united with me in this opinion. General Rey,
the French consul, also had the goodness to invite
the surgeons of the French frigates in our harbor, as
they had had much experience in gun-shot wounds,
to render their assistance. They immediately came;
but, to prevent his being disturbed, I stated to them
his situation, described the nature of his wound and
the direction of the ball, with all the symptoms that
could enable them to form an opinion as to the event.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 35 l

One of the gentlemen then accompanied me to the
bedside. The result was a confirmation of the
opinion that had already been expressed by Dr. Post
and myself. During the night he had some im-
perfect sleep; but the succeeding morning his symp-
toms were aggravated, attended, however, with a
diminution of pain. His mind retained all its usual
strength and composure. The great source of his
anxiety seemed to be in his sympathy with his half-
distracted wife and children. He spoke to me fre-
quently of them. * My beloved wife and children,'
were always his expressions. But his fortitude
triumphed over his situation, dreadful as it was;
once, indeed, at the sight of his children, brought to
the bedside together, seven in number, his utterance
forsook him; he opened his eyes, gave them one
look, and closed them again till they were taken
away. As a proof of his extraordinary composure of
mind, let me add that he alone could calm the
frantic grief of their mother. ' Remember, my Eliza,
you are a Christian,' were the expressions with which
he frequently, with a firm voice, but in a pathetic
and impressive manner, addressed her. His words,
and the tone in which they were uttered, will never
be effaced from my memory. At about two o'clock,
as the public well know, he expired."

With the exception of the assassination of Lincoln
and the deaths of Washington and Garfield, no public
or private event has ever created the deep and general
sorrow which was manifested over the melancholy
termination of this most unfortunate affair. Burr
was disfranchised by the laws of New York for
having fought a duel, and was indicted for murder in
New Jersey. The affair had the effect of arousing

3 $2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the public mind of the people in the Northern States
to a positive horror of duelling. The Society of the
Cincinnati took the question under consideration,
and General C. C. Pinckney, Vice-President of that
body, proposed that it should resolutely set its face
against the practice. Mr. Morse, in his " Life of
Hamilton," says: " The city was not a safe place for
Burr. He fled for his life, and his terrified myrmi-
dons hastened to avail themselves of the protection
of obscurity. Never again could that blood-stained
man redeem his reputation before mankind, so in-
finitely more fatal was that duel to the survivor than
the victim."

Undoubtedly the survivor .was made to feel the
hell that seems to have been reserved for him upon
earth. The living victim of that fatal meeting upon
the banks of the noble Hudson was the greater
victim of the two. He killed his opponent, to be
sure, but he made him a god, with fifty millions of
people to-day as worshippers, and ingloriously shot
himself into a loathsome living grave. Sabine, in his
description of this duel, says:

The reader cannot have failed to notice that, in the
correspondence between Burr and Hamilton which pre-
ceded the duel, the cause of offence is stated to consist in
certain expressions uttered by the latter in the presence of
Dr. Cooper. But we are not to limit General Hamilton's
animadversions to a single case or occasion, since he himself
admits, in the paper which contains his Remarks explana-
tory of his motives and views, that his unfavorable criti-
cisms had been frequent and severe. . . . But we have a
right to condemn Hamilton for accepting the call. He was
not a duellist. True, in his youth, 1778, he acted as second
in the combat between Colonel Laurens and General Lee ;
but we have his express declaration that " his religious and

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 353

moral principles were strongly opposed to the practice of
duelling." He met his antagonist, who, in his judgment,
was a corrupt man — for what? Because, to use his own
words, " his relative situation, as well in public as private,"
imposed upon him, as he thought, "a peculiar necessity not
to decline ;" and because, regarding " what men of the
world denominate honor," he considered that " his ability to
be in future useful, whether in resisting mischief or effecting
good, in those crises of our public affairs which seem likely
to happen, would probably be inseparable from a conformity
with public prejudice in this particular." He violated, then,
his religious and moral principles, rather than not conform
to "public prejudice." Hamilton — in the deepest sorrow be
it uttered — though one of the illustrious of the world, and
to live forever in our annals, was hardly less than a suicide.
When dying, he declared that " he had found, for some time
past, that his life must be exposed " to Burr ; and yet he
resolved to go out and be shot down, without remonstrance
or resistance. This is undeniably true. Without remon-
strance— for "explanation on the ground was," he said, "out
of the question." Without resistance — for he affirmed, in
his last hours, to Dr. Hosack, that " Pendleton knew that he
did not intend to fire at" Burr ; to Bishop Moore, that "he
met him with a fixed resolution to do him no harm ;" and
to Dr. Mason, that " he went to the field determined not to
take his life." An examination of the course of his oppo-
nent allows us, after the lapse of half a century, to repeat an
emphatic remark of the time, that he was a victim to "a
long meditated and predetermined system of hostility on the
part of Mr. Burr and his confidential advisers." Burr
arrived first at the lonely spot designated, and, calmly di-
vesting himself of his coat, cleared away the bushes, limbs
of trees, and other obstructions ; and in the combat raised
his arm slowly, and took deliberate and fatal aim. Nothing
but Hamilton's death would satisfy him. When abroad, in
1808, he gave Jeremy Bentham an account of the duel, and
said " he was sure of bemg able to kill him ;" and so, re-
plied Bentham, "/ thought it little better than a murder"

354 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Posterity will not be likely to disturb the judgment of the
British philosopher.

The weapons used by Hamilton and Burr are at
present in the possession of a citizen of Rochester
(New York). For more than fifty years they were in
possession of the descendants of Hamilton, who gave
them to the mother of the present possessor, also a
descendant of Hamilton. In appearance they are
very formidable. They are "horse-pistols" of Eng-
lish manufacture, and are exactly alike, so far as an
ordinary observer can discover. The one from which
Burr fired the fatal missile is marked by a cross filed
under the lower part of the barrel. They do not in
any respect resemble any modern arm. In handling
them one is strongly impressed with the idea that
they were evidently intended for use in duels where
the participants " shot to kill" and not to obtain
newspaper notoriety without the disagreeable shed-
ding of blood. Although they evidently could not
be manipulated so rapidly as the modern double-
acting, self-cocking pistol, they are capable of fatal
execution, as they carry a bullet of 56 calibre. They
are sixteen inches long, and are, in reality, small guns
rather than pistols. The barrels appear to be of the
best steel then manufactured, and the weapons
throughout are heavily mounted with brass. They
are very carefully finished in all their parts, and
were evidently very expensive. A curious feature of
these pistols, unknown to the present generation, but
remembered by some of the older readers who have
handled their grandfathers' muskets, is the flint-
locks. These, with their flints in position, are intact.
It seems almost incredible, to-day, in view of the
advance of everything pertaining to gunnery, that

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 355

men should risk their lives on the spark from the
flint and steel. It is evident, however, from an ex-
amination of these weapons, that the flints were cut
with the precision of the face of a diamond, and it is
probable that there was as little likelihood of their
missing fire as there would be with the most finished
cartridge-weapon of the present day. The pistols
are " sighted " with a view to the purpose for which
they were made, and in the hands of a man with a
steady nerve and strong arm would prove a very
dangerous weapon. Placed beside one of these
heavy duelling weapons, an ordinary revolver ap-
peared dwarfed into a toy-pistol, and one of its
cartridges was almost lost when dropped into the
spacious muzzle. Aside from the great historical
interest attaching to the weapons, this comparison of
the almost perfect weapon of to-day with that of
eighty years ago, doubtless the most perfect of that
day, is startling. The interval marks the transi-
tion and growth of weapons of defence, from the
clumsy mechanism of flint and steel, and powder and
ball, to the weapon which is capable of being dis-
charged six times in as many seconds, and reloaded
in a few additional seconds. The increase in cer-
tainty of aim and power of execution is not, however,
so obvious. The pistols are in a remarkable state of
preservation, and are apparently in as good condition
as when used for the last time that fatal morning on
the banks of the Hudson, having been carefully
preserved and cared for during these eighty years.
Such, in brief, is a description of these interesting
relics, the mementoes of a great tragedy, which had
much to do with moulding the political events of the
century in the United States. Very few, and those

3 $6 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

only family friends, have been aware of the existence
of these reminders of the dark tragedy in the family,
and it is only with much reluctance that the possessor
permits any present reference to them — a reluctance
which is easily appreciated. It is the intention of the
owner to always keep them in the possession of his
family and never allow them to be publicly exhibited.
One of the first objects that attracts the atten-
tion of a stranger on his first visit to Washington
Heights, New York, is the old Hamilton homestead,
at Tenth Avenue and One Hundred and Forty-fifth
Street. The house is a large frame structure, with a
series of wooden columns running around the front
and one side, and has been kept in comparatively
good repair for so old a wooden building. It stands
at the north end of a large tract of ground. In this
house Alexander Hamilton lived, and it was from
here that he went forth and crossed over to Weehaw-
ken on July n, 1804, to meet Burr in the unfor-
tunate duel which ended in his death. At the south-
east corner of the old house thirteen tall trees tower
upward. They are surrounded by a wooden fence,
and grow so closely together that in some places
they seem to be welded into one huge trunk. They
were planted by Hamilton himself, and were named
after the thirteen original States. One of them,
which is the most northern of the thirteen, early
developed a tendency to crookedness, and this the
statesman christened South Carolina. It is now a
full-grown tree, but shorter than its fellows because
of a long bend in the trunk about ten feet from the
ground. The top of another has been broken off and
only about twenty feet of the trunk remain. The
trees are really the most interesting part of the sur-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 357

roundings of the old mansion, and they are visited
almost daily by strangers and others.

The remains of Hamilton lie in the family church
yard, although the monument erected by the corpo-
ration to his memory is (1883) sufferyig from decay.
The inscription has become almost undecipherable
and the pediment is cracked. Some years ago, when
public attention was called to the matter, Trinity
Corporation made some slight effort to restore the
dead patriot's monument, but now it seems to have
other uses for its money. The corporation has actu-
ally voted to allow Alexander Hamilton, grandson of
the statesman, to do the work it ought to attend to,
and have the inscription restored. The Hamilton
family have been connected with the parish for a
century, and they, together with the public, are at a
loss to account for the neglect. But Trinity does
things queerly. Nearly thirty years ago, when there
was a determined movement to cut Pine Street
through Trinity graveyard, the corporation put up a
brown-stone monument to the memory of the un-
known soldiers of the Revolution buried there. It
was done rather to preserve their own territory than
to honor the dead patriots. In an open space at the
top of the monument it was designed to place a
bronze statue of a soldier in the uniform of the
"Old Continentals." But this part of the pro-
gramme has never been carried out. The space re-
mains empty and the monument looks incomplete.
However, it answered its commercial purpose, and
this was enough, though it is not known that any
soldier was ever buried in the locality covered by the
brown-stone pile.

Alexander Hamilton (as well as Judah P. Benja-

35$ THE FIELD OF HONOR.

min, the father of George M. Dallas, and others
quite as distinguished) came from one of the smaller
islands of the Lesser Antilles. "Hamilton came
from Nevis," says a New York correspondent of the
Cincinnati Enquirer, " which is a volcanic island
made of a single conical mountain which rises to the
height of 2500 feet, and has fertile land around its
borders, an area of only twenty-one square miles,
and a population of perhaps 10,000. It exports
about $250,000 a year of sugar, rum, and molasses.
Hamilton was born on the nth of January, 1757.
His mother was the daughter of a West India doctor
named Faucette. She was of French Protestant
origin, and had first been married to a Dane named
Levine, who is said to have been a Jew. Levine was
rich, and she hated him and got a divorce from him,
and married a young Scotchman, who was a trader
in the island of St. Christopher. This Scotchman
(Hamilton) made a bad failure in business and never
got on his feet again, and afterward lived obscure.
That is not to be wondered at, considering the small
opportunities in those islands for a career. Alex-
ander Hamilton left in the island of Nevis might
have been of no consequence. I saw people there
who impressed me as strong and brilliant, but they
had merely colonial opportunities, and in that hot
climate the energies of men soon decay. Hamil-
ton's mother died unhappy when he was a child; but
she had some respectable kin in the island of Santa
Cruz, who took charge of the orphan boy, who was
the only child to survive her. Hamilton was, there-
fore, brought up in St. Croix, and his earliest letters
are dated from that island. He wrote one to a
friend named Edward Stevens in 1769, which says;

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 359

* Ned, my ambition is prevalent, so that I contemn
the grovelling condition of a clerk or the like, to
which my fortune condemns me, and would willingly
risk my life, though not my character, to exalt my
station. I wish there was a war.' Hamilton was a
good French as well as English scholar. His first
friend was a Presbyterian preacher at St. Croix.
Though he despised a clerkship, in that position he
developed the abilities which made him a great finan-
cier. He was a newspaper- writer; and a description
of a hurricane in the island of St. Christopher, which
was published in one of* the West India newspapers,
was talked about so much that his friends concluded
to send him to New York to be educated. He went
to school at Elizabeth (N. J.), and then at King's
College, in New York, and thought he would be a
physician. He had only been in the country about a
year or two when he addressed a public meeting and
wrote articles for the New York newspapers against
the British Government. His precocity may be as-
cribed to his French and Scotch nature, and to an
ambition which never ceased. The French element
gave him his brilliancy, and the Scotch his exactness
and judgment."

In 1776, at the age of nineteen, Hamilton became a
Captain of artillery, and distinguished himself in
many battles. In March, 1777, he became an aid-de-
camp to Washington, with the rank of lieutenant-
colonel. In 1780 he married Eliza, a daughter of
General Philip Schuyler, and shortly afterward was
appointed inspector-general. Subsequently he was
appointed a major-general, and upon the death of
Washington became Commander-in-Chief of the
Army. It was as Secretary of the Treasury, how-

360 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ever, that he gained pre-eminence, and Webster once
said of him: "He smote the rock of the national re-
sources, and abundant streams of revenue gushed
forth. He touched the dead corpse of the public
credit, and it sprung to its feet. The fabled birth
of Minerva from the brain of Jove was hardly
more sudden or more perfect than the financial
system of the United States as it burst forth from
the conception of Alexander Hamilton." Mrs. Ham-
ilton survived her husband fifty years, dying in New
York in 1854, aged ninety-seven.

Aaron Burr was the son* of an American clergy-
man, and was born at Newark (N. J.), on the 6th
of February, 1756. He entered the army as a pri-
vate soldier, and received a commission of major for
great gallantry and meritorious service during Ar-
nold's expedition* against Quebec. He next became
an aid-de-camp, to Putnam, and afterward received
a commission as lieutenant-colonel, and was placed
in command of his regiment. In July, 1783, he mar-
ried Mrs. Prevost, the widow of a British officer.
Burr subsequently became a senator, and afterward
the third Vice-President of the United States — his
term closing March 4, 1805. He was arrested for
treason on February 19, 1807, and was tried in Rich-
mond (Va.), the jury returning a verdict that ** Aaron
Burr is not proved to be guilty under the indictment
by any evidence submitted to us." He married
Madame Jumel in his seventy-eighth year, but was
soon afterward dismissed from her bed and board.
Burr's only child, Theodosia, married Governor
Allston, of South Carolina. Burr died, in destitute
circumstances, on Staten Island, on September 14,
1836.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS 361

It is an interesting fact that on the nth of May,
1884, the statue of Chief-Justice Marshall was un-
veiled in Washington with appropriate ceremony —
the Marshall whose duty it became to try for high
treason the man who had killed his friend Hamil-
ton, but who conducted that trial with such an
absence of personal feeling that it was among the
greatest marvels of our legal history. He could
neither be influenced by his private grief for Hamil-
ton, nor by Jefferson's attempts as President to
injure Burr, nor by Burr himself — whom he charged
the jury to acquit — but whom he held under a bond
on another charge, to the indescribable rage of the
slayer of the eminent Federalist.

Ben Perley Poore, in his charming Reminiscences
(1884), says:

Aaron Burr enjoyed the reputation of having delivered
the most impressive speech ever uttered in the capitol when
he took leave of the Senate as its presiding officer. I have
heard a senator, who was present, state that nearly every one
was in tears, and so unmanned that it was nearly half an
hour before they could recover themselves sufficiently to
choose a President pro tempore. The characteristics of
Vice-President Burr's manner appear to have been elevation
and dignity, a consciousness of superiority, etc., nothing of
the whining adulation, those canting, hypocritical complaints
of want of talents, assurance of his endeavors to please them,
hopes of their favors, etc. On the contrary, he told them ex-
plicitly that he had determined to pursue a conduct which
his judgment should approve, and which should secure the
suffrage of his own conscience, and he had never considered
who else should be pleased or displeased, although it was
but justice on this occasion to thank them for their defer-
ence and respect to his official conduct, the constant and
uniform support he had received from every member, of
their prompt acquiescence in his decisions, and he remarked

3^2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

to their honor, that they had never descended to a single
motion of passion or embarrassment ; and, so far as he was
from apologizing for any decisions he had occasion to make,
there was not one which, on reflection, he was disposed to
vary or retract. Burr was unquestionably one of the most
remarkable men that our country has ever produced. The
things which clouded his name in his own day were the
suspicion and charge of treason, and his duel with Hamil-
ton, in which the great financier fell. Burr was a vic-
tim of the barbarous custom of those days, and he killed
a popular favorite. Other vices cluster around his name,
but they cannot present him, even to the eye of moral
judgment, as less than an "archangel fallen." When a
boy, residing with my parents at the corner of Madi-
son Lane and Broadway, I used to see Burr pass every
morning and afternoon, as he went to and from his law-
office. Tall, soldier-like, and walking with a soldier-like air,
he attracted attention as he passed along, and people would
stop and point him out to others after he had gone by. One
day I was in the law-office of Allen Day, where my uncle,
the late Allen Dodge, of Hamilton, was studying his profes-
sion, and Burr came in to inquire about a case in which he
was counsel. I regarded him with dread, yet I was fascinat-
ed by the courtesy of his manner, the pleasant expression
of his bright, keen eyes, and the gentle winning tones of his
voice. He was at that time virtually an outcast from the
circles in which he had once been a leading figure. Very
poor, he often took cases which other lawyers refused to
touch, and he often found it difficult to procure the necessi-
ties of life. Yet he never lost his dignity and self-respect,
and appeared, amid the trials and vicissitudes of his old age,
to enjoy the peace and serenity which only a quiet con-
science can bestow. He was undoubtedly the first political
"boss" of the State of New York, and it was by following
his advice that Van Buren passed from office to office until
he became the President of the United States.

During the latter portion of 1883 the St. Louis Re-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 363

publican published the following account of the recol-
lections of a lady who once felt the irresistible power
and fascination of Burr's piercing eyes:

In New York City, a few weeks since, died Miss Theodosia
Burr Davis, in her seventy-seventh year, only sister of Col-
onel George T. M. Davis, well known to some of the former
residents of St. Louis as formerly a prominent member of the
Illinois bar, aid-de-camp to General James Shields in the
Mexican War, and in 1849-51 editor of a newspaper in this
city. Miss Davis was a lady of brilliant and highly cultivated
intellect, fine conversational powers, and remarkable energy.
Though tried by disappointment and sorrow as few have
been, she retained her vivacity and wit almost to the last,
while by a life which was, in most respects, one long self-sac-
rifice, she won and kept the esteem and affection of a large
circle of relatives and friends. Her virtues, however, were so
entirely domestic and private that the only excuse for this
brief notice is the fact that she was indirectly connected with
an historical personage in whom the public is always interest-
ed. The father of Miss Davis died young, and she was left to
the guardianship of his brother, Matthew L. Davis, the inti-
mate friend and biographer of Aaron Burr — one of that little
band of devoted adherents who never abandoned their unfor-
tunate chief, and who were known in those days as " Burr's
Tenth Legion." Though she bore the name of his idolized
daughter, and was the niece and ward of a man so closely
associated with him, Miss Davis never saw Burr but twice.
Their first meeting made a profound impression upon her,
as well it might. She was at her uncle's house, spending a
portion of a school-vacation, when one morning when she
was upstairs he called to her to come down, as there was a
visitor who wished to see her. For some reason she never
could explain she had an undefinable dread of this unknown
visitor, and did not at once obey the summons. It was re-
peated with emphasis, which put an end to further hesita-
tion, and she came down. Mr. Davis took her by the hand
and they entered the parlor. There she saw sitting on the

364 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

sofa a little old man, dressed in the fashion of a past genera-
tion, with hair as white as snow and eyes so lustrous and
piercing that she could not resist their fascination. With
the stately courtesy of the ancient regime, her uncle led her
toward the stranger and said : " Colonel Burr, this is the
child of whom I spoke. I need not tell you whose name she
bears." The old man rose and grasping both her hands in
his held her at arm's length, gazing into her face with those
marvellous eyes as if he would read her very soul. The or-
deal lasted but a moment, though it seemed an age to the
timid girl; then her hands were dropped, and Burr ex-
claimed, in faltering voice: "Take her away, Matthew, I
cannot stand it !" Once afterward they met accidentally on
Broadway. She hurried past without speaking, but Burr
stopped, and as she looked round she saw his eyes following
in a long, wistful gaze, as if they would draw back to him
the bearer of that beloved name.

The late General James Watson Webb, talking of
Aaron Burr three or four years ago, said:

I knew him. He was a brave soldier in the Revolutionary
War. He succeeded my father as aid on General Putnam's
staff after the battle of Bunker Hill. Burr was a selfish
scoundrel. I met him often during his last years. He used
to urge Matthew L. Davis to write his (Burr's) life, but he
added, only on one condition — you know what that is. Da-
vis turned to me and explained that Burr wouldn't permit
his life to be written unless the biographer would agree to
" tell the truth about Washington," by which Burr meant
abuse him and deny him any great qualities, either as a man,
a soldier, or a statesman. Davis would never consent to this.
"I won't do it," he said to Burr in my presence. "Then
you sha'n't write my life," responded Burr. The fact is Burr
never forgave Washington for refusing to appoint him Min-
ister to France in 1795, when his party in the Senate unani-
mously recommended him for the distinguished place.
Washington always disliked the brilliant New Yorker, whose
various qualities were just the opposite of his own, and the

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 365

feeling was naturally reciprocal. During the last year of his
life, when he was eighty-one, Burr withdrew the condition,
but then he could not talk much, and Davis's materials were
too meagre. " Send for Webb and Verplanck," said Burr.
We went to his bedside. " You two write out all the ques-
tions you can think of about my life," said Burr, "and then
come here and read them and I will answer them." We did
so, and the answers formed the basis of Davis's biography —
which was very partial, like Parton's, and not half true. One
day the doctor told Burr he would not live till morning.
Burr turned his eyes toward us and said : " He's an infernal
old fool. Open that bureau drawer." It was opened. " Do
you see a letter on that box ?" Verplanck took up the dainty
missive. " It is from a lady," said the dying gallant, "and
she says she will call on me to-morrow. Anybody who
thinks I will die with such an appointment as that on hand
doesn't know Colonel Burr !" He was supported by friends
for years. He pretended to practise law, but he never prac-
tised much. He had no sense of honor in money matters.
He would borrow fifty dollars on one corner and distribute
it to anybody who wanted it on the next corner.

366 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XVIII.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS-CONTINUED.

Fall of the Illustrious Decatur at Bladensburg in a Duel with
James Barren — The Second Most Noted Fatal Affair in the
United States — The Distinguished Naval Hero Falls Mortally
and his Antagonist Dangerously Wounded at the First Fire
— They Exchange Forgiveness of Each Other on the Bloody
Ground — Decatur's Last Words: " I have never been your
Enemy, Sir" — Decatur's Remains in St. Peter's Churchyard in
Philadelphia— The Old Decatur Mansion in Washington —
Decatur's Other Affairs — His Great Fame and Reputation — His
Encounter at Tripoli and Revenge of the Treacherous Murder
of his Brother, Lieutenant James Decatur — Other Affairs of
Honor between United States Army and Navy Officers — Duels
among Confederates — The Fatal Meeting of Generals Marma-
duke and Walker.

THE fall of the noble and chivalrous Decatur at
Bladensburg, on March 22, 1820, produced a pro-
found sensation throughout the country; and this
unfortunate affair, in which the distinguished naval
hero lost his life, has been generally viewed as the
second most noted duel in the United States.
Stephen Decatur and James Barron were and had
been for several years post-captains in the American
navy. Barron had been found guilty of the charge
of neglecting his duty while in command of the fri-
gate Chesapeake by a court of inquiry and court-
martial (upon both of which Decatur had served),
and had been suspended from the service. He had

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 367

subsequently applied for restoration of rank, and
had been opposed by Decatur from an honorable
standpoint. This was the prime cause of an enmity
which sprung up and grew between the two officers,
and which was followed by a long and acrimonious
correspondence between them and culminated in a
hostile meeting in which Decatur was mortally and
his antagonist dangerously wounded at the first fire.
Captain William Bainbridge, U. -S. N., accompanied
Decatur to the field, and Captain Jesse D. Elliott,
U. S. N., acted as second for Barren. They fought
with pistols, at eight paces, and both fired and fell
together, and then carried on a short conversation
while they lay on the ground. What they said is not
positively known, except that they exchanged for-
giveness of each other. ' Before the mischief had been
committed, however, Barren remarked to Decatur
that he hoped that on meeting him in another world
they would be better friends than in this; to which
Decatur replied, " I have never been your enemy,
sir." The dying officer was taken to his residence in
Washington, near Lafayette Square, where he ex-
pired at a quarter to eleven o'clock the same night.
Barren was also conveyed to Washington, where he
was confined by his wound until the loth of April
following, when he departed for his home at Hamp-
ton (Virginia). Decatur's remains were taken to
Philadelphia in 1844, and deposited in St. Peter's
Churchyard, over which was erected a pretentious
tomb and an Ionic pillar of marble (the latter capped
by an American eagle), which may be seen by all visi-
tors to the " Quaker City" who care for a stroll down
to the southwest corner of Third and Pine streets.
The house in which Decatur died was afterward

368 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

occupied by Mr. Livingston while Secretary of State
under President Jackson, and subsequently by Martin
Van Buren while Vice-President. It is now the resi-
dence of General E. F. Beale, who is as hospitable
and generous as his mansion is noble and historic.
The pistols used by Decatur and Barren were taken
possession of by Captain Elliott (Barren's second),
who retained them until his death (in 1845), when
they came into the possession of their present owner,
General W. L. Elliott (Retired List U. S. A., and
Vice-President of the California Safe Deposit and
Trust Company), of San Francisco — a son of Barren's
second above named.

Mr. Wirt (then Attorney-General of the United
States), who knew in confidence of the difficulty
between Decatur and Barron, and who used every
effort to prevent the duel, in a letter to Judge Carr,
dated eleven days after the fatal combat, states that
" Decatur was apparently shot dead; he revived, how-
ever, after a'while, and he and Barron had a parley
as they lay on the ground." And Wirt continues:

Doctor Washington, who got up just then, says that it
reminded him of the closing scene of a tragedy — Hamlet and
Laertes. Barron proposed that they should make friends
before they met in heaven (for he supposed they would both
die immediately). Decatur said he had never been his
enemy, that he freely forgave him his death, — though he
could not forgive those who had stimulated him to seek his
life. One report says that Barron exclaimed, "Would to
God you had said this much yesterday !" It is certain that
the parley was a friendly one, and that they parted in peace.
Decatur knew he was to die, and his only sorrow was that
he had not died in the service of his country.

Mr. Sabin, in his description of this duel, declares,

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 369

feelingly, and, we think, correctly, that there was no
cause for it whatever. Says Sabine:

Decatu-r, as will be seen in the correspondence, " dis-
claimed all personal animosity toward" Barren. In his own
words — " Between you and myself there never has been a
personal difference ; but I have entertained, and do still
entertain, the opinion that your conduct as an officer, since
the affair of the Chesapeake, has been such as ought to for-
ever bar your readmission into the service." In this view
he declares that he is sustained, he believes, by every
officer of "our grade," with a single exception. True,
Barren, in his letter of November 30, 1819, regards Decatur's
course to be inconsistent with these declarations, and re-
torts with much severity. But Decatur constantly main-
tained them. He told Mr. Wirt that he did not wish to
meet Barron, and that " the duel was forced upon him ;" and
it is said that he assured Commodore Rodgers, on receiving
the challenge, that nothing could induce him to take the
life of Barron. On the day of his death, while at breakfast,
remarks Mr. Hambleton, " he was quite cheerful, and did
not appear to have any desire to take the life of his antago-
nist ; indeed, he declared that he should be very sorry to do
so." To this evidence we may add the reply to Barron on
the ground : " I have never been your enemy, sir."

Decatur's first u affair of honor" was in 1799, while
he was a lieutenant attached to the frigate United
States. He was at Philadelphia on recruiting ser-
vice, and was deceived by a party of men he had
enlisted, who deserted him and went on board an
India ship. Decatur was greatly incensed, and for-
mally demanded the deserters of the first officer of
the merchantman, who, in the course of the inter-
view, insulted him. He stated the case to his father,
who considered that a duel was necessary. The
officer of the India ship was asked to apologize. He
refused, but accepted a challenge. Both, however,

370 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

pursued their ordinary duties for several days. As
soon as circumstances would permit, they met on the
banks of the Delaware, at or near New Castle.
Decatur disclaimed to his friends any intention to
inflict a mortal injury, but wounded his antagonist in
the hip, as he said, previous to the combat, he would
do, and escaped himself without harm. The next
difficulty which he proposed to settle by an appeal to
arms occurred in 1801, while he served on board the
frigate Essex, in the Mediterranean. The officers of
a Spanish ship of war, under pretence of exercising
police duty at the port of Barcelona, fired over, and
brought to, the boats of the Essex in passing to and
from the shore at night. Decatur, on being
molested in this way, remonstrated with the proper
officer, who treated him uncourteously. Avowing
his intention to press the matter on the following
day, he returned to his own ship. On repairing to
the Spanish ship, as intimated, the aggressor was not
to be found. Decatur, leaving a hostile message,
went immediately on shore, but was unsuccessful in
his search there. The Spanish Captain-General
interfering, and requesting the aid of the captain of
the Essex, a personal conflict was prevented. His
third affair was also in the Mediterranean, but as the
friend of Midshipman Joseph Bainbridge, in the year
1803, a description of which occurs in Chapter XIV.

"Affairs of honor" between officers of the United
States army and navy were quite frequent up to 1850,
after which time they ceased almost altogether. A
great many valuable lives were sacrificed, however,
among whom was Captain Ferdinand Louis Ame-
lung, U. S. A., who was killed in Louisiana in 1820;
Midshipman John Banister, U. S. N., in Virginia in

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

1835; Lieutenant Samuel H. Bryant, U. S. A., in North
Carolina in 1814; Midshipman Samuel B. Cocke, U.
S. N., near Washington in 1822; Captain Joshua W.
Collett, U. S. A., in Mexico in 1848; Surgeon Willis H.
Bassett, U. S. N., in South America in 1830. In 1849^
in Virginia, Midshipman J. P. Jones, U. S. N., fought
with James Hope, and was dangerously wounded at
the first fire. It has been stated that the pistols usetd
by these gentlemen were the same as those used by
Decatur and Barren: which is not so, as General
Elliott has had the weapons used by the latter in his
possession since 1845. 1° J839, at Port Mahon (Island
of Minorca), Midshipman Charles Crillon Barton was
wounded by a brother-officer. Midshipman William
Caney was a participant in the first duel fought in
California (early in 1849), an<^ was wounded in the
leg. Lieutenant Richard Somers, U. S. N., a Revo-
lutionary officer, fought three duels in one day, and
was wounded in the first two. Somers perished in
the Intrepid fire-ketch, before Tripoli in 1804. In
1847, in the city of Mexico, Captain Andrew Porter,
of the U. S. Rifles, and Captain Archer, of the Vol-
tigeurs, met with pistols, and the latter was woundexi
in the leg. About the same time, or afterward, Lieu-
tenant David Bell (2d Dragoons U. S. A.) and Lieu-
tenant Robert Williams (who married the widow of
Stephen A. Douglas) met near Washington with pis-
tols, and the former received a slight wound.

In 1863, after the defeat of the Confederates at
Helena (Arkansas), a bitter feeling grew up between
Generals Walker and Marmaduke, of Price's army,
which was intensified into a quarrel after the appear-
ance of their respective reports upon the retreat from
Helena to Little Rock, and culminated in a duel in

372 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

which Walker was mortally wounded and died in
twenty-four hours. Walker, who was the superior
officer, sent the challenge; which Marmaduke ac-
cepted, and named revolvers as weapons; distance,
fifteen paces. Walker's first bullet took off a twig
from a branch directly over Marmaduke's head, and
the second missile from the latter went through
Walker's body and lungs, from which he reeled and
fell, and from the effect of which he died at Little
Rock upon the following day; Marmaduke was put
under arrest, but, his services being valuable, he was
shortly afterward released.

During the fall of 1864, Major Rapley and Captain
Belden, who were members of the Confederate Gen-
eral J. F. Fagin's staff, — whose command was opera-
ting in Missouri at the time, — became involved in a
quarrel which resulted in a duel with revolvers, at
fifteen paces; terms, to fire at the word and then
advance and fire at will. The duel took place near
Independence, early in the morning. Rapley fired
in quick succession, but made no advance. Belden,
however, took seemingly deadlier aims at his antag-
onist, and advanced at every shot. The latter was
hit, though, early in the combat, and reeled like a
drunken man and fired unsteadily, of course; and at
last fell at the feet of Rapley, after throwing his
weapon away and crying, " My God! I ought to be
killed for not hitting a man as close as this." Belden
was shot through and through, but recovered.

A singular affair was that between Lieutenant La-
nier, of Bishop and General Folk's staff, and a wagon-
master of the same (Confederate) corps. Lanier was
a very dressy but a gallant fellow, and while executing
some order, or attempting to, he incurred the dis-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 373

pleasure of an irascible wagon-master, one morning,
who said menacingly to Lanier, "If you didn't have
on so much gold braid, I'd challenge you to fight."
" You would, eh ?" replied Lanier, who at once tore
off his jacket and added, "Come on, then; we're
equal !" In ten minutes the parties had taken their
positions, with revolvers, at twelve paces, and at the
first shot Lanier fell severely wounded.

374 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XIX.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

The Cilley-Graves Affair near Washington— The Third Most
Noted Fatal Duel in the United States — A Combat under
the Duello upon a Point of Honor — A Grand Old Gentleman
Sacrifices his Noble Life to the Moloch of Punctilio — A Duel
between Congressmen who had Nothing against Each Other —
A Cruel Performance — An Investigation of the Event by a Con-
gressional Committee — The Committee Present a Resolution of
Expulsion of Mr. Graves and One of Censure of Messrs. Jones
and Wise — The Real Instigator of One of the Most Cruel and
Inexcusable Duels on Record left to the Chastisement of the
Law and of Public Opinion.

THE third most noted fatal duel which has taken
place in the United States was that unfortunate and
cruel affair between Hon. Jonathan Cilley (M.C.
from Maine) and Hon. William J. Graves (M.C. from
Kentucky), which took place near the National Capi-
tal, in Maryland (on the road to Marlborough), on the
24th of February, 1838.

Mr. Cilley was attended by Hon. George W. Jones
(M.C. from Tennessee), and Mr. Graves by Hon.
Henry A. Wise (M.C. from Virginia). There were
also present Congressmen Crittenden and Menefee
of Kentucky, Congressman Duncan of Ohio, and
Congressman Bynum of North Carolina.

Mr. Cilley, the noble old gentleman, sacrificed
his valuable life to the hideous Demon of ceremo-
nial "honor." "No one can peruse the report of

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 375

the committee which investigated the affair without
condemning, in particular, the action of one of the
gentlemen connected with this devilish performance,"
declared a writer of the Baltimore press at that time.
The affair originated in certain words spoken by Mr.
Cilley in the House of Representatives and which
reflected upon General James Watson Webb, editor of
the New York Courier and Enquirer. Mr. Graves was
at first the bearer of a note from General Webb to Mr.
Cilley, which Mr. Cilley declined to receive, where-
upon a correspondence took place between Messrs.
Graves and Cilley, resulting in a challenge from Mr.
Graves. The duel was fought with rifles, at eighty
yards. The gentlemen were placed at about a quar-
ter past three in the afternoon, when they exchanged
shots. Mr. Cilley fired first, and Mr. Graves one or
two seconds afterward, and both missed. After the
first fire some argument occurred between the seconds
of the parties and their respective principals, with a
view to closing the meeting at this point if possible.
No satisfactory arrangement could be reached, how-
ever, and the second exchange of shots took place,
with the same result. Mr. Graves persisting and de-
manding another shot, the rifles were again loaded,
the parties resumed their stations, and the third fire
took place, which was the last, as Mr. Cilley was shot
through the body. He dropped his rifle, beckoned to
one near him, and exclaimed, " I am shot !" then, put-
ting both his hands to his wound, fell, and expired in
three minutes.

"Major Ben Perley Poore, in his Reminiscences, says
of this duel:

Mr. Cilley, in a speech delivered in the House of Repre-
sentatives, criticised a charge of corruption brought against

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

some unmarried Congressmen in a letter published in the
New York Courier and Enquirer over the signature of " A Spy
in Washington," and endorsed in the editorial columns of
that paper. Mr. James Watson Webb, the editor of the
Courier and Enquirer, immediately visited Washington, and
sent a challenge to Mr. Cilley by Mr. Graves, with whom he
had but a slight acquaintance. Mr. Cilley declined to re-
ceive the hostile communication from Mr. Graves, without
making any reflections on the personal character of Mr.
Webb. Mr. Graves then felt himself bound, by the unwrit-
ten code of honor, to espouse the cause of Mr. Webb, and
challenged Mr. Cilley himself. The challenge was accepted,
and the preliminaries were arranged between Mr. Henry A.
Wise, as the second of Mr. Graves, and Mr. George W. Jones,
as the second of Mr. Cilley. Rifles were selected as the
weapons, and Mr. Graves found difficulty in obtaining one,
but was finally supplied by his friend Mr. Rives of the Globe.
The parties met, the ground was measured, and the combat-
ants were placed. On the third fire Mr. Cilley fell, shot
through the body, and died almost instantly. Mr. Graves,
on seeing his antagonist fall, expressed a desire to render
him some assistance, but was told by Mr. Jones, ' My friend
is dead, sir!" Mr. Cilley, who left a wife and three young
children, was a popular favorite, and his tragic end caused a
great excitement all over the country. Mr. Webb was gener-
ally blamed for having instigated the fatal encounter : cer-
tainly, he did not endeavor to prevent it. Mr. Graves was
never afterward re-elected — indeed no man who has killed
another in a duel has ever been elected to office in Kentucky.

This was a combat, says Mr. Sabin, under the
duello upon a mere point of honor. There was no
difficulty and there had been no difficulty between
Messrs. Graves and Cilley at any time. Even upon
the ground, after an exchange of shots, the latter
declared that he entertained for Mr. Graves " the
highest respect and most kind feelings.1' Mr. Sabin, in
his description of the duel, says further :

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 377

Mr. Cilley fell mortally wounded, with these sentiments
upon his lips. It has been suggested that, as there was no
personal animosity between these gentlemen, a single fire
should have satisfied Mr. Graves, and that by twice renewing
the challenge the duel was pushed to an unusual, perhaps
to an unjustifiable, extremity. Possibly the intimation is
not destitute of force. But since no condemnation of the
course pursued has been pronounced by persons versed in
the duello, and since the affair was actually conducted
throughout by persons of this description, we are required
to believe that Mr. Cilley was slain in accordance with the
code. In this view of the case, how very deplorable the law
which demanded, or seemed to demand, two members of the
national councils, of unquestioned character, to meet in a
combat which, under the circumstances, was almost sure to
terminate only with the fall of one or both of them ! The
challenge was given because Mr. Cilley declined to accept a
note from Colonel Webb, borne by Mr. Graves, " on grounds
which would exonerate Mr. Graves from all responsibility
growing out of the affair." This Mr. Cilley could not do
without an admission that, in his remarks in the House
relative to Colonel Webb, he had slandered that gentleman ;
and thus, as said Mr. Williams of Maine, in announcing his
death in the Senate, " he accepted the call, because the act
was indispensable to avoid disgrace to himself, to his family,
and to his constituents." The decease of Mr. Cilley was
announced in both Houses of Congress on the 26th of Feb-
ruary, and his remains were interred from the Hall of Rep-
resentatives on the next day. On the ist of March a com-
mittee of seven members of the House was appointed "to
investigate the causes which led to his death, and the cir-
cumstances connected therewith."

The report of this committee was made on the 25th
of April, and was very elaborate and comprehensive,
concluding as follows:

This concurrent testimony of all, without exception, taken
in connection with the written correspondence, the various

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

propositions and answers on the field, and the further fact
that Mr. Cilley had not been informed that Mr. Graves had
undertaken to repeat to others any verbal communication
between them, or that any misapprehension or misunder-
standing existed between them on that subject, utterly
repels the suggestion that any question of veracity had
arisen, or had been made, or was the cause of the challenge
or the death of Mr. Cilley. Indeed any misapprehension
on that subject would have given no more just ground of
animosity, and least of all of the highly vindictive feelings
necessarily aroused by a question of veracity, than the very
evident misapprehension which Mr. Graves labored under
in regard to some parts of the note of James Watson Webb
of which he was the bearer.

The committee will not, in justice to Mr. Graves, harbor
the belief that there were rankling secretly in his bosom
any vindictive or hostile feelings toward Mr. Cilley grow-
ing out of any question of personal veracity, and prompting
him to carry on a deadly warfare under another pretext, not
only without a direct and explicit disclosure of the real
cause of difficulty, such as would have left no misapprehen-
sion on the mind of any one, but under circumstances
which misled the other party and his friends, and left him,
under that false impression, to the forfeit of his life.

The committee have therefore come to the conclusion
that the words spoken by Mr. Cilley in debate in the House
of Representatives, the refusal of Mr. CiTley to receive a
demand for explanation of those words, and his refusal to
assign any other reason for it than that he chose to be
drawn into no difficulty upon the subject, were the causes
which led to the death of Mr. Cilley, under the circum-
stances which have been substantially detailed.

It remains to inquire whether there has been a breach of
the privileges of the House.

It is a breach of the highest constitutional privileges of
the House, and of the most sacred rights of the people in
the person of their representative, to demand in a hostile
manner an explanation of words spoken in debate; to be

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 379

the bearer of such a demand; to demand a reason for re-
fusing to receive it, beyond the mere voluntary election of
the member interrogated ; or to demand, under any circum-
stances, any reason at all. No member can be questioned
in a hostile way, and put to his plea, and yield to it, without
subjecting himself to great disadvantage in the estimation
of many, and impairing his influence and his usefulness as
a member. It is a still more aggravated breach of the
privileges of the House, and of the rights of the people in
the person of their representative, to challenge a member,
and to slay him in combat, for refusing to comply with any
such demand. It is the highest offence which can be com-
mitted against either House of Congress, against the free-
dom of speech and of debate therein, against the spirit and
the substance of that constitutional provision that for any
speech or debate in either House the members shall not
be questioned in any other place, and violates essentially the
right of perfect immunity elsewhere for words spoken in
debate here which is essential to the independence of
Congress and to the existence of constitutional liberty.
And when this offence is committed by a member, it calls
for the exercise of the highest powers of the House to
purge itself of the evil, to maintain effectually its rights
and privileges, and to preserve inviolable this immunity
which is guaranteed by the Constitution, not for the sake
of the individual, but for his constituents and for the
country.

The present case is without any circumstance of extenua-
tion. A member of the House, in a manner most strictly
parliamentary, on an occasion most appropriate, in language
most decorous and moderate, in defence of the honor of the
House against an anonymous and unfounded charge of
corruption, had alluded to the published records of former
proceedings with perfect truth and accuracy ; had, in obe-
dience to his duty, declined a hostile demand for explana-
tion in a manner in which the committee can discover no
cause of offence; had, respectfully, with expressions of
regret, declined to admit the right to interrogate him

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

further; had disclaimed all disrespect, directly or indirectly,
toward his antagonist, and avowed for him the highest re-
spect and the kindest feelings ; and after all this, avowed
without hostility, and against the strongest protestations of
others, he was required fatally to expose himself to the third
discharge of a rifle. On the other hand, Mr. Graves, a mem-
ber of the House, voluntarily and unnecessarily became the
bearer of a demand upon another member in attendance for
explanation of words spoken in debate ; he presented it in
the House, while the House was in session ; he demanded a
reason for the refusal, beyond the voluntary election of that
member to be drawn into no difficulty upon the subject ;
which being withheld, he then challenged him in this city,
and slew him in this vicinity, while Congress was in session.

Every step of Mr. Graves in this progress involved him
deeper and deeper in a breach of the privileges of the
House, until their destruction was consummated in the
person of Mr. Cilley. The eye of reason can discover in the
whole course of Mr. Cilley no offence toward those who
pursued him except that given by alluding to the records of
Congress, in the faithful and upright discharge of his duty
as a member, which justly could have given no offence at
all. Nor can his death be vindicated or excused by any
circumstance whatsoever, not even by that custom, the relic
of unenlightened and barbarous ages, which was formerly
supposed to be a proof of some degree of physical courage,
but is in fact a signal monument of the want of the higher
attribute of moral courage; which has, in these modern
times, degenerated into a game of chance and a scramble
for undue advantages; which can furnish no criterion for
truth, justice, or honor, and deals out its inflictions of
misery most severely upon the unoffending and the helpless;
which is deeply deplored by all men, even those who sub-
mit to it, and is forbidden, in every stage of it, by all law,
human and divine.

It is not necessary, on the present occasion, to go into any
consideration of the general power of the House to punish
for breach of privilege, or to inquire into the origin and

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 381

foundation of that power over contempts which has been
asserted by the Parliament of Great Britain from time im-
memorial, by every legislative body, by every judicial tribu-
nal from the highest to the lowest, and repeatedly by one
or the other House of Congress, and has been recognized as
existing in the House of Representatives by the Supreme
Court of the United States. Whether it be a power neces-
sary to the continued existence of the legislative body or a
power necessary to the free exercise of its legislative func-
tions, it is in either case a necessary power, strictly granted
by the Constitution, and as fully granted as if it were liter-
ally expressed. But in the case of members the Constitu-
tion has expressly granted the power to punish for dis-
orderly conduct, and has also expressly granted the power,
with the concurrence of two thirds, to expel a member for
any cause which two thirds of the House may deem suffi-
cient.

The committee, therefore, viewing the breach of the
rights and privileges of the House on the part of Mr.
Graves to have been an offence of this high character,
against the vital principle of a deliberative assembly and of
representative government, is constrained by a sense of
duty to present to the House a resolution that he be ex-
pelled therefrom.

It has been decided by the House of Representatives, on a
former occasion, that it was a breach of privilege to send a
challenge to a member in attendance, or to be the bearer of
such challenge. And it is equally so to act as second to the
challenger. In the present instance it appears that Mr.
Wise had no knowledge of the demand of explanation which
was borne by Mr. Graves, and had never seen the paper
until after the fatal catastrophe. But having been early
consulted by Mr. Graves upon the first letter of Mr. Cilley,
and concurring with him in his views of it, he bore the
challenge to Mr. Cilley, and he acted throughout as the
second of the challenger, advising and insisting that the
fight should go on until Mr. Cilley fell. The committee,
therefore, deeming him deeply involved, under the circum-

382 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

stances which this case presents, in a breach of the privi-
leges of the House, report a resolution that he deserves the
decided censure of the House, and that he be censured ac-
cordingly.

Mr. Jones had no knowledge of the affair until the de-
termination of Mr. Cilley had been formed as to the accept-
ance of the challenge, and the time, mode, weapon, and
other preliminaries of the meeting. But he was the bearer
of the acceptance, and acted throughout as the second of the
challenged party; and it is the opinion of the committee
that he was thereby involved in a breach of privilege, and
that he be censured therefor.

In regard to the persons not principals nor seconds who
were present on the field and expressed their opinions at
the request of the parties, without having advised, instigated,
or procured the meeting, however they might be implicated
in the courts of law, the committee entertain doubts how far
they would be involved in a breach of privilege ; and, under
a strong conviction that the power of the House should be
exercised, never in a doubtful case, always with moderation,
they content themselves with presenting the facts and cir-
cumstances, so far as those persons are concerned, without
proposing any action thereon.

The committee entertain no doubt that James Watson
Webb has been guilty of a breach of the privileges of the
House; but they also concur unanimously in the opinion
that if there be any real ground to believe that a conspiracy
to assassinate actually existed, as set forth in that atrocious
paper drawn up by him, signed by Daniel Jackson and
William H. Morell, sworn to by the latter, and published in
the New York Courier and Enquirer, he be left to the
chastisement of the course of law and of public opinion,
and that the House will consult its own dignity and the
public interest by bestowing upon him no further notice.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 383

CHAPTER XX.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

A Fatal Duel in North Carolina in 1802 — Henry S. Foote's
many Duels — Judge Child and General Joor — Davis and
Leigh — Smith and Brank — Benjamin Gratz Brown and Thomas
C. Reynolds— Rhett and Cooley— Chambers and Lake— The
Fate of an Irish Gentleman who " would not Disgrace him-
self by Marrying the Lady he had Betrayed" — "Affairs of
Honor" all over the Southern States — An "Amphibial"
Affair, etc.

A FATAL duel which is still spoken of and written
of in North Carolina with mournful interest was
that in which ex-Governor Richard Dobbs Spaight
lost his life at the hands of Mr. Stanley. The
latter had taken offence at a handbill issued by
Spaight repelling certain aspersions made by Stanley
(the two gentlemen were running for Congress —
Stanley on the Republican ticket and Spaight on the
Federal), and challenged Spaight, who accepted and
was killed. The duel took place on the 5th of Sep-
tember, 1802, behind the Masonic Hall, at Newbern.
The parties fought with pistols, at eight paces. At
the first fire both missed. At the second, Spaight's
bullet passed through the collar of Stanley's coat.
They then fired again and missed; but at the fourth
discharge the ex-Governor received a mortal wound,
from the effects of which he died the next day.

Hon. Henry S. Foote, an eminent American states

3 $4 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

man (deceased), born under the shadow of the Blue
Ridge, in Fauquier County (Virginia), and who
lived to honor many important positions, — among
which were Governor of Mississippi and Senator in
Congress, — fought four duels, — the first with Edmund
Winston, at Tuscaloosa (Alabama), in 1827, with
pistols, both combatants being wounded at the first
fire, Governor Foote in the shoulder and Mr. Win-
ston in the hip. This affair grew out of a personal
encounter between Mr. Foote and Stark and Pratt
Washington on one side, and Edmund Winston and
others of that celebrated family on the other, during
which all the participants were more or less injured,
the two Washingtons severely. Some few years
later Governor Foote and the celebrated S. S.
Prentiss had an encounter in the. court-house at
Vicksburg (Miss.), arising out of a dispute over a
law-case, when Foote threw an inkstand at Prentiss.
A challenge to fight a duel followed, of course, and
the parties met in Louisiana, on the opposite side of
the Mississippi River, and Foote was wounded in the
shoulder at the first fire. Shortly afterward indiscreet
friends of Mr. Prentiss said things which angered
Governor Foote, and the latter challenged Prentiss
to another encounter. The challenge was accepted,
and the parties met, as before, with pistols, at ten
paces, and Foote fell with a severe wound in the
right leg, just above the knee, from which he nar-
rowly escaped death. From this time on, until the
death of Mr. Prentiss, these former foes became inti-
mate and affectionate friends, neither ceasing to
regret that, as young and impulsive men, they had
twice met in deadly conflict over a trivial quarrel,
in obedience to the then pretty general public senti-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 385

ment of that country (now happily obsolete) that
an insulted man must vindicate his honor by
endeavoring to take the life of the offender. The
Governor's fourth affair, a few years later, was with
Osman Claiborne (a retired naval officer), near Co-
lumbus (Miss.). The parties fired at each other five
times with pistols, Governor Foote wounding his
antagonist slightly three times. This affair, like all
the other of his combats of this character, occurred
when Governor Foote was a man much below mid-
dle age. It is a curious fact, too, that he knew
almost nothing of the use of duelling-weapons and
was really a miserable shot, and would have regretted
in bitter agony to the day of his death had it ever
been his misfortune to have slain a fellow-man. He
was often heard by his intimates to say that the
bravest and most lovable as well as the most solidly
and brilliantly intellectual man he had ever known
was the gallant and eloquent Prentiss, who went .to
Mississippi from the State of Maine. Two sons and
a daughter (Mrs. Senator William M. Stewart) of the
late Governor Foote reside at present in California.
Mr. Foote in his " Bench and Bar of the South and

Southwest " makes note of a number of hostile meet-

•

ings which have taken place among those men of
whom he writes — but does not present dates — thus:
In Mississippi, between Judge Child and General
Joor, without regular seconds. Child was accompa-
nied to the rendezvous by a " mulatto body-servant,
who drove a vehicle of some kind to the field of com-
bat loaded down with muskets and pistols, which he
was to hand out to his master as the exigencies of the
battle might render necessary." Joor was a native of
South Carolina, and was an ardent admirer of Cal-

386 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

houn. Child was a brilliant New-Englander. Both
were severely wounded. Subsequently, near Wood-
ville (Miss.), Mr. Leigh (son of Benjamin Watkins
Leigh, of Virginia) and Colonel Fielding Davis met
in a duel, and Leigh was killed on the spot. About
the same time Calvin M. Smith and Robert M.
Brank fought in Kentucky, and the latter was slain;
while Smith, who was the challenged party, was
indicted for murder and stricken from the roll of
attorneys.

Early in the century a meeting took place near
Augusta (Georgia) between Captain Robert Flour-
noy, an ex-officer of the Revolutionary army, and
Thaddeus Holt, a prominent Georgian. Both gentle-
men were distinguished shots; so the news of the
impending combat spread far and near, and the duel
was fought in the presence of many spectators. The
combatants met with holster-pistols, at ten paces, and
at the first fire both fell, Holt mortally and Flournoy
severely wounded: Holt's tongue was cut off by
Flournoy's bullet, while the missile from Holt's
weapon ploughed a furrow in Flournoy's forehead and
took off part of his left ear. A short time after this
Lieutenant- Colonel Thomas ^Flournoy (a brother of
Robert), of Jackson's army, fought at Bladensburg
and wounded his antagonist. • Colonel Flournoy, of
San Francisco, who distinguished himself in the Con-
federate service, is a grandson of Captain Flournoy
above named.

In 1861, on Bloody Island, opposite St. Louis, Hon.
Benjamin Gratz Brown and Hon. Thomas C. Rey-
nolds met with pistols, and Brown was wounded in
the leg at the first fire. In New Orleans, in 1877, R.
Barnwell Rhett and Judge William Cooley met with

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 387

shotguns, loaded with bullets to fit the guns, at thirty
paces, and the latter was killed at the first fire. In
1860, on the banks of the river opposite Vicksburg
Henry Chambers and William A. Lake — both very
popular citizens of Vicksburg, and the latter a leading
member and vestryman of the Episcopal Church and
a man of large family — met with rifles at forty paces,
and Mr. Lake was shot dead at the first fire.

In 1824, or thereabouts, Emil Johns, an Austrian
musician, married into a good family of New Or-
leans. In the same family lived an Irish gentleman
named McAdam. McAdam had betrayed a young
lady of the family, and Johns called the Irish gentle-
man to account, and said to him, " Mr. McAdam, you
must make the only reparation that lies in your
power to make — you must marry your victim."
" Impossible ! I should be disgraced." " Then you
must fight, sir !" " With whom ?" " With the gentle-
man standing before you, sir." " I shall be only too
happy to accommodate you." The parties met near
Lake Pontchartrain upon the following morning, with
pistols, and the bullet from the musician's weapon
sped directly through the heart of the Irish gentleman
who would not disgrace himself by marrying the
lady he had betrayed. In 1842 A. Ledoux and M.
Chevremont fought near New Orleans with small-
swords, and Chevremont was killed.

In 1838, near New Orleans, after a long correspond-
ence, Mandeville Marigny and A. Graihle met with
pistols, at thirty paces, the terms of which were as
follows: Each man to have a loaded pistol in each
hand, and each to advance ten paces and fire be-
tween the words " Fire ! one, two, three, four, five,
six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen,

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nine-
teen, twenty" — neither party to cry enough until
twenty had been counted. Marigny fired first and
his antagonist fell, severely wounded. Then Marig-
ny advanced another five paces, pointing his remain-
ing weapon at the fallen man, as much as to say,
" Don't you dare to make a movement until ' twenty '
is reached." Marigny became a high officer in the
Confederate army during the War of the Rebellion.

In Alabama, in 1854, political difficulties sent Dr.
Fant and F. W. Irby into the field with pistols, and
the latter was killed at the first fire. In Charleston
(S. C.), in 1852, Mr. Hall and Mr. Leckie, with
revolvers — Mr. Leckie killed. In South Carolina, in
1849, Mr. Levy and Dr. McCain — the former wounded.
In Kentucky, in 1852, F. S. McKee and Joseph
Murphy, with pistols — both severely wounded at the
fourth shot. In Georgia, in 1829, Henry G. Nixon
was killed at the first fire by an attorney of Savannah,
who fled the country. In Indiana, in 1849, Jonn T.
Gray and Henry C. Pope (of Louisville, Ky.), with
shotguns loaded with single balls, at twenty paces —
the latter mortally wounded. In Pennsylvania, in
1854, A. L. Snowden and W. G. Ready, with rifles — the
latter severely wounded. In New Orleans, in 1851,
William Cummings and Henry Bouligny, with pistols
— the latter killed. At Shreveport, in 1849, Dr. Green
and Hon. D. Hester, with rifles — both killed. In
Florida, in 1833, Attorney-General Campbell became
involved in a political difficulty and was killed in a
duel. In North Carolina, in 1852, W. J. Keith and
O. M. Dantzler met with pistols, and the former was
badly wounded. At Bladensburg, in 1821, a clerk
in the Treasury Department named Randall met

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

another Washingtonian named Fox with pistols, at
eight paces, and the latter was killed at the first fire.
In Mississippi, in 1851, General Smith and General
Freeman, candidates for Congress, fired five times
at each other, when Freeman's bullet took effect and
the duel was terminated. In Kentucky, in 1851, W.
S. Stinet and Robert Mars, with pistols — both
wounded. In South Carolina, in 1853, John Duno-
vant and J. Davidson Legare, with pistols — the latter
killed at the first shot. In Georgia, in 1832, J. J.
Camp and Lowell Woolfolk, with rifles — the latter
instantly killed and the former mortally wounded at
the first fire. In Florida, in 1853, Mr. Collins and Mr.
Winters — the latter killed. In Georgia, in 1854,
Joseph B. Coker and Claudius C. Stewart, with
double-barrelled shotguns, at sixty paces — Stewart
severely wounded at the first discharge. In Ken-
tucky, in 1852, B. Johnson and T. White, with double-
barrelled shotguns, at forty paces — the latter killed at
the first fire. In North Carolina, in 1827, Members of
Congress Carson and Vance, with rifles — the latter
killed. In New Jersey, in 1852, Mr. Stowe and
Mr. Townly, with pistols — both wounded at the first
fire. In Kentucky, in 1849, Mr. Smith and Mr.
Singer, with pistols — both wounded. In Alabama, in
1854, W. H. Bowlingly and Charles Roman, with pis-
tols— Bowlingly wounded. In New Orleans, in 1852,
a desperate duel was fought with knives between
Pedro Tastra and another dealer in fish named Pages.
The combat lasted nearly an hour, at the expiration
of which time Tastra fell dead, having been literally
cut to pieces. Pages was afterward tried for murder
and convicted of manslaughter, but was quickly
pardoned. In 1853, in the same city, a young man

39° THE FIELD OF HONOR.

named Lessess was killed in a duel with pistols by
a former friend aged nineteen. In 1855 two New-
Yorkers named J. B. Breckinridge and F. Leavenworth
quarrelled at the Shakespeare Club, and in a few days
afterward met at or near Niagara Falls with pistols,
at eight paces, and wounded each other at the first
fire. In the winter of 1859, at Denver (Colorado), be-
tween Lewis Bliss, of New York, and Dr. Stone, of Ohio,
with shotguns, at thirty paces (ounce balls), the latter
mortally wounded at the first fire. In the summer of
1859, at Denver, between Richard Whitsett and Park
McClure, with navy revolvers, the latter slightly
wounded in the thigh. Whitsett had never fired a
pistol in his life, and declined to practise even after
the duel had been arranged ; while McClure had the
reputation of being an expert with a pistol, and made
some good shots at a mark the evening preceding the
hostile meeting.

The following, from a Chattanooga (Tenn.) paper
of February 26, 1884, maybe properly termed an "am-
phibial" duel: "The latest tragedy of consequence in
this section of country took place yesterday on a river
steamboat between J. W. Watts and Henry Wilson.
It seems that the belligerents, while on deck, engaged
in a quarrel and grasped each other. Then both drew
knives and slashed away until each had received from
four to six terrible stabs. They finally clinched and
in the scuffle got near the guards, when Wilson made
a desperate effort to throw his antagonist overboard.
Watts hung on to him with a deathly grip, however,
and both went into the waves embraced in a deadly
struggle. They sank and rose to the surface apart ;
but, each trying to stay above the water by holding

.VOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 39 1

the other down, both were at the mercy of the billows
which followed the boat, and soon sank to rise no
more before the steamer could be checkeo^ and a life-
boat sent to their rescue. We doubt if there is an-
other duel like it on record."

The last fatal duel fought in the United States was
that between Colonel William M. Shannon and Colonel
E. B. C. Cash, at Du Bose's Bridge, in Darlington
County (South Carolina), on the 6th of July, 1880, in
which Shannon was shot through the heart at the first
fire.

[Since the above was written there have been a
number of meetings, as follows: At Dallas (Texas),
on the 1 3th of July, 1884, M. U. Beale and Mr. Bowie,
with revolvers; both instantly killed, each receiving
bullets in the head and heart. The same day Lieu-
tenant Cunningham and a railroad man named Daly
fought at Lozier (Texas) with revolvers at thirty
paces, and Cunningham was wounded in the leg at the
third fire. On the i6th of July, 1884, at New Orleans,
Captain J. E. Brou and Evariste Poche met with
colichemardes (triangular-shaped swords), and the
latter was wounded in the thigh in a scuffle during the
progress of the second passage. At Emery Gap
(Tennessee), on the i4th of August, 1884, between
M. Staples and W. H. Rogerson, with revolvers at ten
paces; both killed. In Avoyelles Parish (Louisiana),
between J. Ducote and E. Lemoine, with revolvers;
Ducote dangerously wounded. At Terrell (Texas),
on the loth of August, 1884, William Dougherty and
Zachariah Gray, with revolvers; both badly wounded.]

TH-E FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XXI.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONTINUED.

The Fourth Most Noted Fatal Duel in the United States — David
C. Broderick and David S. Terry Meet in Deadly Encounter
near San Francisco, and the Former Receives a Mortal Wound —
Graphic and Detailed Description of the Tragic Affair — Colonel
E. D. Baker's Great Funeral Oration — The Magnetic Power of
Broderick — His Remains Followed to their Last Resting-Place
by nearly the whole Adult Population of San Francisco —
"Good Friend! True Heart! Hail and Farewell !"— The
Correspondence in Full — Terms of the Duel.

THE fourth most noted fatal duel fought in the
United States was that which took place near San
Francisco on the i3th of September, 1859, and in
which Hon. David C. Broderick (United States
Senator from California) was mortally wounded by
ex-Chief-Justice (of the Supreme Court of Califor-
nia) David S. Terry. This was indeed a meeting of
giants — physical and intellectual giants. It was
the meeting of two noble men, yet each standing be-
fore the other in deadly demeanor, with no hope or
intent but to kill.

Some two years ago (in 1882) a San Francisco
correspondent of the New York Sun wrote to that
paper what seems to the author to be as impartial
and accurate an account of this exciting event as
it is possible to obtain — for, however much we may
sympathize with the living victim of that dreadful

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 393

encounter, or to whatever extent we may be willing
to extend a Christian pardon, we cannot forget that
he killed David C. Broderick— the " noblest Roman
of them all " — and that he cannot be fully forgiven
even after he is dead, at least by those Californians
who idolized their noble leader while living, and who
continue to mourn his untimely taking off. As we
write (it is " memorial-day" in San Francisco), a sky of
spotless blue overhangs Lone Mountain, and away in
the distance we can see the handsome shaft which
perpetuates the memory of the chivalric being whose
remains repose beneath ; while grouped around the
sacred enclosure are the annual pilgrims with their
floral offerings, the perfume of which intermingles
with the aroma of odorous shrubs and plants and an
atmosphere seemingly freighted with the incompar-
able spices of far-off Cathay.

The following is the account from the Sun :
Among the many duels in the early days of California
none excited so much interest, and none had such an influ-
ence on politics and society, as the fatal meeting between
David C. Broderick and David S. Terry. They were repre-
sentative men. One was a United States Senator, and the
other Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court of California.
They were filling important niches in the history of the
young State. No such political antagonism had existed
since the days of Burr and Hamilton. The Republican
Party was a healthy infant, and growing rapidly. The State
was controlled by a two-winged Democracy. Gwin, Terry,
Ashe, Brooks, Ben ham, and others worked the Lecompton
wing, and Broderick, the friend of Stephen A. Douglas
and an ardent opponent of the extension of slavery, was the
soul of the anti-Lecompton wing. He and his followers
occupied middle ground between nascent Republicanism
and the Southern slave-Democracy. The friends of the
Administration cherished a deep hatred for Broderick.

394 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

With him out of the way, they might reunite the party on
the old basis and control it. Broderick and his friends had
thwarted the ambition of the " chivalry." After a desperate
struggle he had secured a seat in the United States Senate,
and had brought the haughty Gwin to terms. To retain his
own seat in that body, Gwin had given the stonecutter a
document pledging himself not to meddle with the official
patronage of the Pacific coast. This document was known
as the "scarlet letter." Broderick had said in a speech that
its writer ought to be as clearly marked for political ostra-
cism as Hester Prynne was socially marked by the initial
on her breast. It was a fatal letter. Politicians said that
the man who had it in his possession was doomed.

The immediate cause of the quarrel grew out of a speech
made by Judge Terry before the Lecompton Democratic
State Convention in Sacramento in 1859. He called Brod-
erick an arch-traitor. He said :

" They [the anti-Lecomptonites] are the followers of one
man, the personal chattels of a single individual whom they
are ashamed of. They belong, heart, soul, body, and
breeches, to David C. Broderick. They are yet ashamed to
acknowledge their master, and are calling themselves, aye,
forsooth, Douglas Democrats, when it is known, well
known to them as to us, that the gallant Senator from
Illinois, whose voice has always been heard in the advocacy
of Democratic principles, who now is not disunited from
the Democratic Party, has no affiliation with them, no feel-
ing in common with them. Mr. President and gentlemen, I
am mistaken in denying their right to claim Douglas as a
leader. Perhaps they do sail under the flag of Douglas ;
but it is the banner of the Black Douglass, whose name is
Frederick, not Stephen."

Broderick read this speech while at breakfast in the In-
ternational Hotel, and grimly smiled. " I see," he remarked
to D. W. Perley, a lawyer (born in Woodstock, N. B., and
a friend of the Gwin faction) "that Terry has been abusing
me. I now take back the remark that I once made that he
is the only honest judge on the Supreme bench. I was his

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 395

friend when he was in need of friends, for which I am
sorry. Had the Vigilance Committee disposed of him as
they did of others, they would have done a righteous act."

He alluded to Terry's arrest by the Vigilantes in August,
1856, charged with cutting a man named Sterling A. Hop-
kins, in the attempt to free from arrest Reuben Maloney.
Had Hopkins died, Terry would probably have hanged. As
it was, it took the strongest influence, Masonic, press, and
other, to save him from banishment.

Perley resented Broderick's remark. He professed to be
a warm friend of Judge Terry, and even went so far as to
challenge the Senator on his own account. His challenge
was curtly declined with the contemptuous remark, " Sir, I
fight only with gentlemen of my own position." Perley
hurried off to Terry and repeated Broderick's slighting
remarks. The spark did not need fanning. It was already
alight. The Judge wrote a letter of inquiry, to which Brod-
erick returned the following reply :

"FRIDAY EVENINQ, September 9, 1859.
" Hon. D. S. TERRY : Yours of this date has been received.
The remarks made by me were occasioned by certain offen-
sive allusions of yours concerning me, made in the Conven-
tion at Sacramento, and reported in the Union of the 2§th
of June. Upon the topic alluded to in your note of this
date, my language, so far as my recollection serves me, was
as follows : ' During Judge Terry's incarceration by the
Vigilance Committee I paid two hundred dollars a week to
support a newspaper in his [your] defence. I have also
stated heretofore that I considered him (Judge Terry] the
only honest man on the Supreme bench. But I take it all
back.' You are the proper judge as to whether this lan-
guage affords good ground for offence.

" I remain, etc., D. C. BRODERICK."

Judge Terry considered the Senator's remarks " fighting
talk," and there was a resort to the code. Calhoun
Benham (now practising law in San Francisco), S. H.

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Brooks (State Comptroller at the time), and Thomas Hayes
attended to his interests, and Joseph C. McKibben, David
D. Colton, and Leonidas Haskell acted for Senator Brod-
erick. As to the niceties of affairs of honor, the gentlemen
who assisted Terry were much superior to Broderick's
friends. McKibben was a Congressman, and probably had
never before participated in a formal duel. D. D. Colton
(now dead) had been sheriff of Siskiyou and the hero of
many rough-and-tumble fights incident to his office in those
lawless days. Haskell was an every-day man, who dabbled
in politics without neglecting his business. Benham,
Brooks, and Hayes, on the contrary, had figured repeatedly
on the field, the latter as principal on one or two occasions.
Mr. Broderick was somewhat surprised at the action of Mr.
Hayes. They had been warm political friends in New
York, and measurably so in California. Both were of Irish
extraction.

A meeting had been arranged for the I2th of September,
at sunrise, near the boundary-lines of San Mateo and San
Francisco counties. The principals and their friends were
all on the ground, when the chief of police, Martin J.
Burke, placed them under arrest. They were brought
before Police Justice H. P. Coon, and discharged on the
ground that there had been no actual misdemeanor.

John A. McGlynn, a brother of a well-known Roman
Catholic clergyman in New York ; Andrew J. Butler, a
brother of General B. F. Butler ; and other friends of
Broderick, had tried to dissuade him from fighting. He
had listened to all their arguments, and had replied that
his mind was made up — the duel could not be avoided with
honor. He was quiet and composed, but inflexible.

It was thought that the arrest would stop further pro-
ceedings, but the principals were determined to have it out.
The fact that a second meeting was to take place on the
following morning was whispered to a few reporters under
a promise of secrecy, and at midnight several vehicles left
the city and drove toward the Laguna de la Merced, about
ten or twelve miles from the city. Here the fight was to

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

take place. It was cold, and the drivers frequently lost
their way in the darkness. The breeze from the ocean cut
like a knife. As day broke a buggy was descried a short
distance ahead, occupied, as we learned on overtaking it, by
Henry Fritz, a confidential friend of Broderick. Notwith-
standing his excessive corpulence, Fritz was blue with cold,
and his teeth rattled like castanets. Another buggy, con-
taining Dr. Hammond, Judge Terry's surgeon, was driven
out of a small canon. "All right," was the general ex-
clamation ; " we are on the track now." The doctor and
Fritz laughed in concert. "We thought to throw you
newspaper people off the scent," said the doctor, " but we
find it is no use." Other carriages were seen coming from
different directions and skirting the lake. They all drew
up at a rail fence which marked the boundaries of a milk-
ranch owned by one Davis, who rubbed his eyes in sleepy
astonishment at such an irruption of visitors. There was
not much conversation. One or two remarks were made,
and a partisan of Terry's audibly whispered that Broderick
might be carried dead from the field. Everybody seemed
to feel that to one man, at least, that beautiful day was to
be a day of death. Vaulting over the fence, the party
went up a valley the centre of which had been selected as
the scene of the encounter. Mr. Broderick had slept at the
Lake House, near by, and with his friends waS early on the
ground. Judge Terry and his friends were also prompt.
About eighty spectators were present.

The seconds held a conference, and the pistols were
examined and loaded. Judge Terry won the choice of
weapons by the toss of a half-dollar. Mr. Hayes marked
off the prescribed distance, ten paces, and warned spectators
to get out of the line of fire. Meantime the respective
seconds were busied about their principals. The Terry
party were cool and collected, as became old hands at the
business. Mr. Broderick's friends were apparently nervous
and hesitating. One incident was not calculated to put the
Senator in good heart. Mr. Haskell partly untied the
Senator's cravat, and then walked off a few paces, wringing

398 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

his hands as though overcome by his feelings. He then
returned and removed the neckerchief,

Broderick was dressed in a long black surtout, and wore a
soft wool hat drawn down over his brow. Terry was similarly
attired. When the principals were placed, the punctilios o£
the code were observed. Calhoun Benham, Terry's chief
second, approached Mr. Broderick, and passed his hands
closely over his sides and chest, searching for concealed
mail. Mr. McKibben made a similar examination of Terry,
but he only touched his fingers to his waistcoat, bowed and
withdrew. It has been thought that Mr. Benham 's action
irritated the Senator and impaired his poise. Before this
Mr. Broderick had taken some coins from his vest-pocket
and passed them to Mr. McKibben. Terry gave his loose
change to Benham, who scattered it contemptuously on the
sward. All things being in readiness, the pistols were
cocked and the hair-triggers set by the seconds. They
were then delivered to the combatants. It was observed at
this time that Mr. Broderick appeared nervous and ill at
ease. He repeatedly twitched the skirts of his surtout, as
though they were in his way. He was also somewhat out
of position, and Mr. McKibben corrected him. Broderick
closely measured with his eye the ground between himself
and Terry. Benham read the conditions of the meeting,
and Mr. Colttm followed with instructions as to the firing.
He had won the word. Broderick was still nervous, but
Terry stood firm and erect, a silhouette against the early
morning light. The men held their weapons muzzle down-
ward. A moment of painful silence ensued.

" Gentlemen," said Mr. Colton, in a clear voice, " are you
ready?" Both replied, but Broderick delayed a few seconds.
He then said, " I am ready."

" Fire ! One — " There was a report from the Senator's
pistol. It was answered in a second by Terry's weapon.
Broderick's pistol was discharged before he brought it to a
level. This was probably caused by the fineness of the hair-
trigger and his want of familiarity with that particular
weapon. The bullet buried itself in the ground, two thirds

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 399

of the distance between himself and his antagonist. It was
a splendid line-shot, fallen short of its mark. Broderick
had the reputation of being an expert with the pistol, and
this result surprised those who knew his skill. With the
crack of Terry's weapon Broderick winced, turned half
round, and then made an effort to recover himself. " Hard
hit," his friends murmured. These words were proved by
his unavailing efforts to maintain an upright position. He
drooped until finally he fell prone on the ground, with his
pale face toward the sky. He was hard hit.

Juggling in the choice of weapons was openly charged in
the newspapers. Bernard Lagoards, the armorer, a French-
man, loaded Mr. Broderick's pistol, and Mr. Brooks charged
the one intended for Judge Terry. The Judge had won the
choice, and had chosen a weapon owned by R. Beard, a friend
of Dr. Aylette, physician of the Insane Asylum at Stockton.
They had been in the Doctor's possession two years. The
armorer said that there was a difference in the pistols ; that
used by Senator Broderick carried the lightest bullet. He
suggested that the usual mode in choosing weapons was to
select those with which both parties were unfamiliar. He
asked McKibben why he did not force his principal to use
his (the armorer's) pistols. McKibben replied that Terry
had won the choice, and the pistols were brought by his
seconds. The armorer had never seen the pistols before,
but maintained, in the presence of the seconds, that they
were too light. He said that they could be discharged by a
jar or jerk, and even went so far as to say that their hair-
triggers might be so finely set that the breath of a strong-
lunged man would discharge them.

The wounded Senator lay on the sward, with his head sup-
ported by his seconds, Colton and Haskell. His surgeon,
Dr. Von Loehr, was nervous, and seemed uncertain how to
act, and incapable of taking prompt measures. Mr. Brod-
erick's life was ebbing away, and his face was pallid. Mr.
Brooks, one of Terry's seconds, advanced, and, on behalf of
his principal, tendered the services of his surgeon, Dr. Ham-
mond.

400 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

" Yes, for God's sake," exclaimed McKibben, who was
greatly excited, "send some one here, or Mr. Broderick will
die where he lies !"

Dr. Hammond then came to Dr. Loehr's assistance, and
cut away the wounded man's clothing, exposing his chest
and the wound. It was a sorry sight. With every breath
arterial blood spurted from the wound in bright jets and
stained the fair skin. The group surrounding the fallen
man shuddered. Strength of constitution, fortified by ab-
stemious habits, might enable him to hold death off for a
short time, but the brightness of the blood told that he was
doomed. The ball entered the right breast between the
second and third ribs, passing under the sternum, fracturing
the edge, and then took a course over the heart, through
the upper lobe of the left lung, striking the fifth rib on the
left side, and proceeding upward, passed through the left
armpit. Its tortuous course was remarkable, and the rend-
ing of the vitals must have been terrible. No wonder the
Senator was unable to maintain an erect position for a
second shot, and no wonder that he sank nerveless to the
earth.

" Baker," said he, on his dying bed, to his fast friend, the
orator, soldier, and statesman, — and they were the last words
he spoke to him, — " Baker, I tried to stand firm when I was
struck ; but I could not. The blow blinded me."

As soon as Broderick fell, Davis, the owner of the ranch,
who had been silently regarding the proceedings, started to
his feet and shouted, " That is murder, by God !" He
moved toward Terry, as though intending to assault him.
He was intercepted by bystanders, who said that it was folly
to provoke additional bloodshed. Davis brushed them aside,
exclaiming, " I am Broderick's friend ; I am not going to
see him killed in that way. If you are men, you will join me
in avenging his death."

" We know you are Mr. Broderick's friend, but we know
as well that if you attack Terry there will be a general fight,
and but few will get off this ground alive. Think a moment
before you do this thing."

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 40 1

Luckily, this scene was not witnessed, nor the remarks
overheard, by any of the Terry partisans, else there would
have been a bloody conflict, whether their leader had been
attacked or not. The milkman was quieted and sat himself
down, breathing threatenings of slaughter.

Terry remained in his place. His arms were folded, and
the muzzle of a pistol projected behind him. He stood
erect, with face raised and an inquiring look, as though
awaiting a demand for a second shot. His coolness and
nerve were shown in the remark just after he delivered the
fire : " The shot is not mortal ; I have struck two inches to
the right." Others say his words were, " Ah ! I struck him
a little too high."

Being assured of the helpless condition of his antagonist,
he moved toward the carriages with his friends and then
drove hastily to the city. He went to Stockton, where he
owned a ranch, and quietly awaited events. Here he was
arrested on the 23d of September by two San Francisco
police officers, brought to the city, and put under ten
thousand dollars bonds.

Mr. Broderick was removed from the ground three quar-
ters of an hour after he was shot, placed on a mattress in a
spring wagon, and taken to the residence of his friend
Leonidas Haskell, at Black Point. He lingered in great
pain until Friday, September 16, and expired at 9.20 in the
morning. He did not speak much during his suffering.
From his rent and torn breast no breath came without exer-
tion. Words were agony. He felt, to use his own expres-
sion, as though a thousand-pound weight was pressing on
his chest. But he did utter a sentiment which had great
significance a few years after his death. " They have killed
me," he said, " because I was opposed to slavery and a cor-
rupt administration."

The death-bed scene was deeply affecting. The viaticum
had been given by the priest, Father Maraschi. Around the
couch, which had been drawn into the centre of the room,
weeping friends were grouped — those who had honored and
loved him in life, and were now assembled to witness,

402 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

through their tears, the exit of that great soul that had won
men and controlled councils. There were present Mr. and
Mrs. Haskell, the Misses McDougall, Miss Cook, Colonel
Edward D. Baker, ex-Governor McDougall, Hon. J. C. Mc-
Kibben, General Colton, Hon. John Conness, Colonel A. J.
Butler, John A. McGlynn, Elliott J. Moore, Herman Wohler,
Moses Flannagan, and many others, prominent in social and
political life, ^whom he had "grappled to his heart with
hooks of steel." Governor McDougall stepped forward and
closed the eyes that had looked their last.

Editors wrangled over the dead in a way that led to the
belief that a feeling of self-interest had mingled with their
sorrow. The Times, edited by C. A. Washburne, brother of
E. B. Washburne, seemed to say, " See how much greater is
my grief for the dead Senator than yours." Many expres-
sions never uttered were credited to Broderick. Wash-
burne was working in the interests of the Republican Party.
The Alia and Call mourned without stint, while the Bulletin
lost sight of individuals in considering the superior question
of the morale of duelling. The Herald (Lecompton) had no
tears for the fallen. It criticised only the mode of the kill-
ing, and patted Terry on the back. One of its articles
brought out this reply :

" In the Herald this morning we are reported as saying,
' And if there was any advantage on either side it was surely
with Mr. Broderick.' We have not made this statement,
nor, at the same time, have we imputed any unfairness to
Judge Terry or his seconds. Further, we have passed no
judgment on the press and its peculiar views as to the un-
fortunate affair, our duty being simply to correct statements
emanating either from the friends of Mr. Broderick or Mr.
Terry not warranted by the facts. This we have done in all
cases. The Herald of this morning contains the most seri-
ous misstatement we have yet seen. Mr. Broderick had not
the choice of weapons, nor were his friends aware, until the
publication of the Herald, that one weapon was easier on

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 403

the trigger than the other. Had we believed there was any

unfairness there could have been no meeting.

"Jos. C. McKiBBEN,
" DAVID D. COLTON.
"SAN FRANCISCO, September 16, 1859."

From the time that Broderick was wounded the whole
city was in mourning. Every consideration was subordinate
to anxiety as to his condition. His death was a public
calamity. The remains were brought to the Union Hotel,
corner of Kearny and Merchant streets, where they lay in
state amid pyramids of flowers until Sunday, the i8th.
Crowds of citizens awaited the body. Among others an old
man walked up to the coffin, with hands crossed over his
chest, whispering a prayer. He touched the forehead of the
dead, and murmured, "God bless you! Your soul's in
heaven ! God bless you ! California has this day lost her
noblest son."

Then, reverently crossing himself, he walked slowly away.
The incident is cited as an example of Broderick's peculiar
power in creating a following aside from those who looked
to him for patronage. This magnetic power was the bed-
rock of his political strength. He inspired affection other
than that of mere gratitude.

The funeral took place at half-past one o'clock on Sunday
afternoon. Before the procession moved, Colonel Edward
D. Baker took a conspicuous place on the plaza, known as
Portsmouth Square, opposite the hotel, and in the presence
of a concourse that embraced nearly the entire adult popu-
ulation of the city pronounced a funeral oration. The
beauty and magnificence of this tribute to a dead friend are
historical. The orator's voice was heard far and wide, and
those who crowded the streets leading to the plaza, for
blocks away, caught his words distinctly. The peroration
was as follows :

" But the last words must be spoken, and the imperious
mandate of death must be fulfilled. O brave heart, we

4O4 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

bear thee to thy rest ; thus surrounded by tens of thousands
we leave thee to the equal grave. As in life no other voice
among us so rang its trumpet-blast upon the ear of free-
dom, so in death its echoes will reverberate amid our moun-
tains and our valleys until truth and valor cease to appeal to
the human heart.

" The earth may ring from shore to shore

With echoes of a glorious name,
But he whose loss our tears deplore

Has left behind him more than fame.
For when the death-frost came to lie

Upon his warm and mighty heart,
And quenched his bold and friendly eye,

His spirit did not all depart.
His love of truth, too warm, too strong

For hope or fear to chain or chill;
His hate of tyranny and wrong,

Burn in the hearts he kindled, still.

" Good friend ! True heart ! Hail and farewell ! "

The San Francisco Evening Bulletin contained the
following in its issue of September 17, 1859:

The following statement is from Mr. Perley, detailing the
difficulty that occurred between Senator Broderick and him-
self, at the International Hotel, which directly was the cause
of the fatal duel :

" I was sitting at the breakfast-table of the International
Hotel, directly by the side of Mrs. Colonel James. Her
husband sat on the other side of her. Directly opposite sat
Selover and Broderick. I spoke to both politely and took
my seat, and then commenced a conversation with Mrs.
James. Broderick then addressed himself to me as follows
' Your friend Terry has been abusing me at Sacramento.'

" I said, 'What is it, Mr. Broderick?'

" He replied : ' The miserable wretch, after being kicked
out of the convention, went down there and made a speech
abusing me. I have defended him at all times when all

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 405

others deserted him. I paid and supported three news-
papers to defend him during the Vigilance Committee days,
and this is all the gratitude I get from the d — d miserable
wretch for the favors I have conferred on him. I have
hitherto spoken of him as an honest man — as the only
honest man of a miserable, corrupt Supreme Court — but
now I find I was mistaken. I take it all back.'

" I then spoke as follows : ' Who is it you speak of as a
wretch ? '

" He said, ' Terry.'

" I said, ' I will inform the Judge of the language you
have used concerning him.'

" He said, ' Do so ; I wish you to do so. I am responsi-
ble for it.'

" I then said, 'You would not dare to use this language
to him.'

" He sneered at this, and echoed me — ' Would not dare ! '

" I replied, ' No, sir, you would not dare to do it, and you
shall not use it to me concerning him. I shall hold you
personally responsible for the language you have used.' "

Mr. Perley mentions Mr. Selover as having been present
on the occasion, and we submitted the above statement to
him, with the request that he would correct anything in it
according to his memory of the occurrence. Mr, Selover
stated that the whole language used by Mr. Broderick was
in an undertone of voice, he — Broderick — with his body
across a narrow table in the direction of Perley. " Mrs. Selo-
ver, who sat on my right, did not hear what Mr. Broderick
said on the occasion. Mr. Broderick had but a few
moments before read in the Sacramento Union Judge
Terry's offensive remarks in the convention. When Mr.
Perley retired from the table I expressed my regret at what
had occurred, to which Mr. Broderick replied that he was
provoked into it by the remarks of Judge Terry upon him."
Selover says : " I have been induced to make this statement
only by the fact that Judge Terry's friends have gone
beyond the record, which is shown by the correspondence
previous to the duel to have contained all the language

406 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Judge Terry had to take offence at. Statements having
been subsequently made that Mr. Broderick had used vio-
lent language in the presence of ladies, and I being a more
intimate personal friend of his than Colonel James, who sat
directly opposite to me at the table, the latter gentleman
was requested to make a statement of what occurred, which
was done." Major Selover also said in his statement that he
had no recollection of the word "damned " being used on
that occasion, as he sat directly opposite, and, had it been
used, he must have heard it.

In the Democratic Standard (Sacramento, September
16, 1859) appeared the following correspondence,
which preceded the duel between Mr. Broderick and
'Judge Terry:

To the Public.

As the recent hostile meeting between Messrs. Broderick
and Terry has attracted much public attention, and has been
the subject already of many misstatements in the news-
papers, it is deemed necessary to publish the correspondence
between those gentlemen. The papers are in their chrono-
logical order. CALHOUN BENHAM,

THOMAS HAYES.

Terry to Broderick.

OAKLAND, Sept. 8, 1859.
Hon. David C. Broderick.

SIR : Some two months ago, at the public table of the In-
ternational Hotel, in San Francisco, you saw fit to indulge
in certain remarks concerning me which were offensive in
their nature. Before I heard of the circumstances, your
note of the 29th of June, addressed to D. W. Perley, in
which you declared that you would not respond to any call
of a personal character during the political canvass just
concluded, had been published. I have, therefore, not been
permitted to take any notice of those remarks until the ex-
piration of the limit fixed by yourself. I now take the earli-

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 407

est opportunity to require of you a retraction of those re-
marks. The note will be handed to you by my friend
Calhoun Benham, Esq., who is acquainted with its contents,
and will receive your reply.

[Signed] D. S. TERRY.

Benham to Broderick.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 8, 1859.
Hon. David C. Broderick.

SIR : Should you have occasion to communicate sooner
than the time agreed upon between us, I will be found at
the Metropolitan Hotel. I omitted to leave my address this
morning.

Very respectfully your obedient servant,
[Signed] CALHOUN BENHAM.

Broderick to Terry.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 9, 1859,
Hon. D. S. Terry.

SIR : Your note of September 8 reached me through the
hands of Calhoun Benham, Esq. The remarks made by me
in the conversation referred to may be the subject of future
misrepresentation, and, for obvious reasons, I have to desire
you to state what the remarks were that you designate in
your note as offensive and of which you require from me a
retraction. I remain, etc.,

[Signed] D. C. BRODERICK.

Terry to Broderick.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 9, 1859.
Hon. D. C. Broderick.

SIR : In reply to your note of this date I have to say that
the offensive remarks which I alluded to in my communica-
tion of yesterday are as follows : " I have heretofore con-
sidered and spoken of him [myself] as the only honest man
on the Supreme Court bench, but I now take it all back" —
thus, by implication, reflecting on my personal and official
integrity. This is the substance of your remarks, as re-

408 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

ported to me. The precise terms, however, in which such
an implication was conveyed are not important to the ques-
tion. You yourself can best remember the terms in which
you spoke of me on the occasion referred to. What I
require is the retraction of any words which were used
calculated to reflect on my character as an officer or a
gentleman.

I remain your obedient servant,
[Signed] D. S. TERRY.

Broderick to Terry.

FRIDAY EVENING, Sept. 9, 1859.
Hon. D. S. Terry.

SIR : Yours of this date has been received. The remarks
made by me were occasioned by certain offensive allusions
of yours concerning me made in the convention at Sacra-
mento and reported in the Union of June 25. Upon the
topic alluded to in your note of this date, my language, so
far as my recollection serves me, was as follows :

"During Judge Terry's incarceration by the Vigilance
Committee I paid two hundred dollars a week to support
a newspaper in his [your] defence. I have also stated, here-
tofore, that I considered him [Judge Terry] the only honest
man on the Supreme bench; but I take it all back."

You are the proper judge as to whether this language
affords good ground for offence. I remain, etc.,

[Signed] D. C. BRODERICK.

Terry to Broderick.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 10, 1859.
Hon. D. C. Broderick.

SIR: Some months ago you used language concerning
me offensive in its nature. I waited the lapse of a period
of time fixed by yourself before I asked reparation therefor
at your hands. You replied, asking a specification of the
language used which I regarded as offensive. In another
letter I gave you the specification, and reiterated my de-
mands for retraction. To this last letter you reply,

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 409

acknowledging the use of the offensive language imputed
to you, and not making the retraction required.

This course on your part leaves me no alternative but to
demand the satisfaction usual among gentlemen, which I
accordingly do.

Mr. Benham will make the necessary arrangements.

Your obedient servant,
[Signed] D. S. TERRY.

Broderick to Terry.

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 10, 1859.
Hon. D. S. Terry.

SIR : Your note of the above date has been received — at
one o'clock A.M., September 10. In response to the same,
I will refer you to my friend Hon. J. C. McKibben, who
will make the satisfactory arrangements demanded in your
letter. I remain, etc.,

[Signed] D. C. BRODERICK.

Terms' of the Duel.
(Time — Saturday morning, about one o'clock.)

1. Principals to be attended by two seconds and a sur-
geon each ; also by a person to load the weapons. This
article not to exclude the drivers of the vehicles. If other
parties obtrude, the time and place may be changed at the
instance of either party.

2. Place of meeting — On the farm adjoining the Lake
House ranch (Laguna Merced) occupied by William
Higgins.

3. Weapons — Duelling-pistols.

4. Distance — Ten paces ; parties facing each other ; pis-
tols to be held with the muzzle vertically downward.

5. Word to be given as follows, to wit : " Gentlemen, are
you ready ?" Upon each party replying " Ready," the word
"fire" shall be given, to be followed by the words "One —
two;" neither party to raise his pistol before the word
"fire," nor to discharge it after the word "two."
Intervals between the words " fire," " one," " two," to be

4IO THE FIELD OF HONOR.

exemplified by the party winning the word, as near as may
be.

6. Weapons to be loaded on the ground in the presence
of a second of each party.

7. Choice of position and the giving of the word to be
determined by chance — throwing a coin, as usual.

8. Choice of the two weapons to be determined by chance,
as in article 7.

9. Choice of the respective weapons of parties to be
determined on the ground, by throwing up a coin, as usual
— that is to say, each party bringing their pistols, and the
pair to be used to be determined by chance as in article 7.

On the part of Judge Terry it was protested against the
word being stopped short of the word " three," as unusual
and unwarrantable. Mr. Broderick's seconds answered the
protest in regard to the parties being restrained by the word
"two," that it is neither unusual nor unwarrantable, and has
the feature of humanity.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 411

CHAPTER XXII.
NOTED AMERICAN DUELS— CONCLUDED.

The Fatal Meeting between Johnston and Furgeson — The Kewen-
Woodleif Affair — The Fate of the Survivor — Hubert and Hunt
— The Latter Mortally Wounded at the Second Fire — Nugent
and Jones — Thomas and Dixon — Shaffer and Wethered — Re-
volvers, Rifles, and Double-Barrelled Shotguns the Favorite
Weapons with the Californians — Truett and Smith — Woodcock
and Blackburn — Tobey and Crane — Lundy and Dibble — Haw-
kins and Dowdigan — Dubert and Ellesler — Wright and Evans —
Hopkins and Taylor — Leggett and Morrison — Hacker and
Londen — May and Rowe — Peachy and Blair — Brazer and Park
— Pinckney and Smith — Kelley and Spear — Wright and Baird;
and Others.

DUELS were frequent in California from 1850 until
1859, and very frequent from 1851 until 1854. The
most notable fatal event — next to the Broderick-
Terry affair — was the meeting between George Pen-
dleton Johnston and William I. Furgeson, which took
place with pistols, on Angel Island (San Francisco
Bay), August 21, 1858, and in which Mr. Furgeson re-
ceived a mortal wound. Mr. Johnston having died
lately, a number of accounts of the unfortunate affair
have been published, the following being from the
San Francisco Morning Call :

On Friday last, the body of George Pendleton Johnston was
laid away by his sorrowing friends for its final rest. With
him disappeared one link connecting the old school of

412 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

journalism with the new. Allusion has been made during
the past week, in all the newspapers of this city, to his duel
with State Senator William I. Furgeson. This was the
great controlling event of his career, and is therefore de-
serving of more than the passing mention it has received.
Its influence on his life and character never ceased or abated
until his eyes were closed in death. He was a changed man
ever after, and the shadow of that tragic event was to his
soul like that typified by Poe's mystic " Raven ;" the " mid-
night dark and dreary" of its coming was to him the fatal
anniversary of the duel, when the shadow invariably deep-
ened on his brooding heart. He was a Kentuckian, born
and reared among a people whose traditions and sentiments
not only accepted the duello, but exalted it as the tribunal
of honor; and, while he would probably always have -justified
to his fellow-men the slaying of any one under its rules, his
humane, generous heart could never let him rest in entire
peace with himself under the knowledge that a human being
had died through act of his. All his surroundings, as well
as his antecedents, led him to the duel. He was not only
born and reared in a State where " the code" was maintained
and justified, but he emigrated to one where it was even
more resorted to for the settlement of differences. The
duello was never more popular anywhere, probably, in the
decade from 184910 1859 than in California. ... So many
people had fallen or been injured that about 1856 the prac-
tice of duelling fell into disfavor and disuse. The Johnston-
Furgeson affair gave it a new impetus, which culminated in
the killing in 1859 of David C. Broderick by David S. Terry,
who resigned the Chief -Justiceship of the State Supreme
Court to engage in this famous duel. The parties to the
first of these two affairs were both prominent men, and the
part each -had taken in the exciting political events of the
three preceding years had made them widely known. John-
ston had been a member of the Assembly, where he had
taken a prominent part, among other things of introducing
and pushing to passage an anti-duelling act, to give force
and effect to the constitutional provision on that subject.

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 4*3

He was an ardent supporter of Dr. Gwin for the United
States Senatorship, and opposed to the pretensions of Brod-
erick, engaging in that contest with all his ardor and ora-
torical ability, which was considerable. In addition, he had
rendered his decision as United States Court Commissioner
in the celebrated case of the negro Archie, which created
much feeling for its bearing on the question of slavery — the
more by reason of its being a ruling by a Southern man in
favor of the negro under one application of the fugitive-
slave law ; and finally he was Clerk of the United States Cir-
cuit Court in San Francisco. Furgeson was a remarkable
man, then in the prime of life and the full flush of his splen-
did talents. The son of a carpenter, born in Pennsylvania,
he removed to Springfield, Illinois, where he studied law
under Colonel E. D. Baker, and rose to a level at the bar
with such associates as Abraham Lincoln, David S. Logan,
Baker, and others of that calibre; thence removing to Texas,
and finally to Sacramento, in this State, where he took and
maintained his position among the brightest men at the bar,
excelling especially in the department of criminal law. Pos-
sessed of great ambition, a brilliant genius, one of the most
eloquent and fascinating orators California has ever held in
citizenship, he entered politics, and soon became one of the
most conspicuous characters in public life here. Elected to
the State Senate on the Know-Nothing ticket, he was in a
sense a candidate for the United States Senate in the ex-
citing session of 1855-6, but finally supported General Henry
S. Foote, father of our present Railroad Commissioner of
that name, upon the General's receiving the caucus nomina-
tion of the party. When the defection of Wilson Flint, one
of the hold-over Senators from San Francisco, who disre-
garded his party obligations and refused to vote for General
Foote, prevented the latter 's election and enabled Broderick
to carry off at the next session the prize for which he strug-
gled so long, only to find it a disappointing bauble when
gained, Furgeson distinguished himself by the force of the
withering invective with which he denounced the " rec-
reant." Then Furgeson became more prominent by

414 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

renouncing the Know -Nothing Party, his constituents
demanding his resignation, and his successful canvass for
a re-election at the next polling, and lastly, by a remarka-
bly able speech on squatter sovereignty shortly before his
death, when he followed the Douglas wing of the Demo-
cratic Party in the disastrous spirit of that time. Furgeson
had one unfortunate frailty to which genius is often linked.
Like many brilliant men of that as of all other times, he
was addicted to strong drink. In his convivial hours — or
days — he was hilarious to a point quite inconsistent with the
dignity of the senatorial character, even drunken senatorial
dignity, as understood here a quarter of a century ago, and
some of his roystering performances had gained for him the
nickname of " Yip-see-Doodle." During the senatorial con-
test above mentioned, General Foote was thrown into such
a transport of rage by a taunting mention of " Yip-see-Doo-
dle," on the part of Colonel A. J. Butler, that he seized his
tormentor, a man twice as large as he, by the collar in a
ludicrous effort to shake him. One evening about the mid-
dle of August, 1858, Johnston and Furgeson met in the old
Bank Exchange saloon on Montgomery Street. A joke by
Furgeson, in which the names of ladies, friends of Johnston,
were ludicrously introduced, was resented by the latter.
High words ensued and weapons were drawn. Friends
present interfered and they were parted. Johnston, who be-
lieved himself insulted, sent his friend W. P. Dameron to
Furgeson the next day to demand an apology or satisfaction
in the regular way of the duello. Furgeson refused the
apology, was challenged, and accepted. It was first arranged
that they should meet near Saucelito, but this was modified,
and at five o'clock on Saturday afternoon, August 21, they
stood facing each other in hostile attitude in a secluded
glen on the east side of Angel Island, near where the quarry
now is. Every traveller on the ferry between this city and
San Quentin Point has seen the spot. Washington and
Damerom were the seconds of Johnston; Eugene L. Sul-
livan and J. M. Estill of Furgeson. Drs. Hitchcock, Angel,
and White were in professional attendance, and besides

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 415

these there were quite a number of spectators. The prin-
cipals stood ten paces apart, resolutely waiting the word,
which was in the usual form : "Are you ready? Fire ! One
— two — three. Stop!" After the interrogatory, both men
answered firmly and exchanged shots at the word. Neither
was harmed, and by mutual consent the distance was less-
ened. Again they fired without injury to either. The dis-
tance was again shortened, and a third time they fired
ineffectually. At the beginning it was agreed that this
should be the limit of the encounter, but Johnston insisted
on an apology or a continuation of the fight. Furgeson
was firm in refusing any sort of apology, and again the men
faced each other, this time but twenty feet apart. The word
was given ; they fired simultaneously. Johnston's wrist was
grazed, and Furgeson sank into the arms of his seconds, his
right thigh shattered by the bullet of his adversary. While
he was lying on the ground, undergoing surgical exami-
nation, Johnston expressed a wish to give him his hand
before quitting the ground. Furgeson faintly replied that
he was in the hands of his seconds. Upon their assenting,
Johnston advanced and, grasping the hand of his prostrate
opponent, said warmly, " Uncle Furg, I'm sorry for you."
" That's all right," whispered Furgeson ; whereupon John-
son remarked, " That's enough said between gentlemen,"
and left the ground with his friends. Furgeson was removed
to this city, where he was attended by half a dozen or more
of the best surgeons here, including Drs. Sawyer, Grey, Coit,
Angel, and Bowie. They advised him from the first that his
wound was a serious one; that with prompt amputation of
the limb there were fair chances of his recovery, but without
it a very slim chance. He replied that he would not part
with his leg for the whole of California, and that he would
take the solitary slim chance they intimated. He sank
slowly ; the wound began to mortify ; and when finally, on
September 14, the amputation of the leg was attempted, he
died under the operation. His death created a profound
feeling on this coast, for he was recognized as a man of
remarkable talents and promise. The body was taken to

41 6 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Sacramento for burial. A large delegation of prominent
people from that city met it at Benicia and conducted it to
the capital. It was laid in state in the Senate chamber,
where, carrying out the dying request of his unfortunate
young friend and pupil, Colonel E. D. Baker pronounced,
in the presence of a great assemblage, the funeral oration,
followed by an impressive sermon by Rev. J. A. Benton, of
the Congregational Church. A great concourse followed
the remains to the grave, and the people of Sacramento
erected a handsome monument which yet marks the resting-
place of their gifted but unfortunate Senator. Of course the
sentiment was now largely in sympathy with Furgeson and
against his slayer, and it was asserted that the duel was
unfair because Furgeson knew nothing of the use of the
pistol. Without expressing an opinion in regard to this,
Colonel Baker mentioned it in his funeral oration, stating
that Furgeson had never fired a pistol till the day before the
duel. The reply to all this is simply that he, as the chal-
lenged party, named the weapons. Before the latter's death
Johnston left the city on the U. S. revenue cutter W. L.
Marcy, and it was said that he had run away to avoid
responsibility for the duel ; but upon being indicted by the
San Francisco Grand Jury, under the anti-duelling act, of
which he was the author, he came back to stand his trial.
The Grand Jury of Marin County having also presented
him for the same offence, he chose to meet his trial there,
and surrendered to the authorities of that county. The
trial took place before the Court of Sessions at San Rafael.
The district-attorney prosecuted, and A. P. Crittenden, W.
H. Patterson, E. L. Gould, and T. W. Hanson— all since
deceased — defended. The defence was that the wound was
not necessarily fatal, and that if Furgeson had consented to
an operation when advised to he would have recovered.
The medical testimony supported this theory, and the de-
fence succeeded in securing an acquittal. The proceeding
on the indictment in this county was dropped on the show-
ing that the duel occurred in Marin County. So far as the
law was concerned, Mr. Johnston was free from responsibility

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS.

for the affair. He acted on the principles of a mistaken if
chivalrous "code," which was inbred and inculcated in him,
and justified him to his fellow-men who believe in or bow
to that code. Men of coarser or less noble mould would
have rested easy and content with such justification, but his
gentle, humane heart never threw off the shadow of the
tragedy.

In 1854 occurred the fatal duel between Kewen
and Woodleif, which has been described by a corre-
spondent of the San Francisco Evening Post, as fol-
lows :

Achilles Kewen, brother of E. J. C. Kewen, of Los An-
geles, and Colonel Woodleif, who had been County Judge
of San Joaquin County, had a political dispute in the old
Blue Wing saloon near Sather's Bank, in November, 1854.
Both were Southern men, Kewen being of Irish parentage.
Kewen struck Woodleif, but other parties quickly separated
them. Kewen acknowledged that he had been too hasty,
and he apologized. Woodleif refused to accept the
apology. He had fought eight duels and had killed some
of his men. He was educated and polished and well-to-do.
Kewen then offered to place in Woodleif's hand an apology
in writing. Woodleif refused to accept this. He chal-
lenged Kewen, and they met ten miles back of Oakland,
November 8, 1854. At the first fire, which was with "Mis-
sissippi yagers," at forty paces, Woodleif was shot in the
head and instantly killed. He was buried at San Francisco,
in the clothes which he wore when shot, at his own re-
quest. He left a widow. Kewen went to Nicaragua with
Walker, was taken prisoner in battle and put to death, in
defiance of the laws of civilized warfare. E. J. C. Kewen
was also with Walker, but escaped his brother's fate.

Another unfortunate affair was the duel between
George T. Hunt, an Englishman, and Numa Hubert,
a native of New Orleans, of French parentage.

41 8 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

Both were lawyers, without family, and arrived in
San Francisco at an early day. They met, and in
due time — or, rather, undue time — they quarrelled at
the Metropolitan Theatre and clinched, but were
quickly separated before the audience was disturbed.
Next day Hunt received a challenge from Hubert,
which he accepted, and the parties met at the old
Pioneer Race Course, at seven o'clock on the morn-
ing of May 2i, 1854. The weapons were duelling-
pistols, distance ten paces. Two shots were ex-
changed, when Hubert fell, mortally wounded in the
abdomen, and died at four o'clock the next morning.
In June, 1852, near San Francisco, William H.
Jones and John S. Nugent met with pistols, and the
former was wounded. In March, 1854, three miles
from Sacramento, Philip F. Thomas, district-attorney
of Placer County, and Dr. James P. Dixon, of the
San Francisco Marine Hospital, met with duelling-
pistols, at thirteen paces ; and the latter was mor-
tally wounded. In 1857, near San Francisco, Cap-
tain Frank Shaffer and James P. Withered, with
double - barrelled shotguns, eighteen buckshot in
each barrel, wheel and fire ; no casualty ; Governor
Stoneman (then a lieutenant in the U. S. A.) was one
of the seconds. In October, 1855, Austin E. Smith
and H. B. Truett met near San Francisco, with
Colt's revolvers, at ten paces, and Smith was hit in
the leg ; he was afterward killed in the Confederate
army at Richmond. In 1852, at Marysville, William
H. Woodcock and Charles J. Blackburn met with
double-barrelled shotguns, at fifty paces, each barrel
carrying eighteen buckshot, terms to fire between
one and six ; Blackburn was severely wounded at the
first fire in the left arm, which was shattered and

NOTED AMERICAN DUELS. 419

broken near the shoulder, and also in the groin. In
1853, near San Francisco, Alfred Crane and Edward
Tobey, with navy pistols, at ten paces ; Crane, who
was the challenged party, was shot through the body
and died upon the following morning. In 1851,
near San Francisco, E. B. Lundy (a Canadian) and
George M. Dibble (formerly a midshipman in the
U. S. A.), with pistols ; the latter killed. In 1854,
near Sacramento, Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Dowdigan^
with rifles, at forty paces ; the latter wounded in the
arm. During the same year Dubert and Ellesler
fought their extraordinary duel with broadswords,
which lasted nearly an hour, at the end of which
Ellesler was severely and Dubert mortally wounded —
the latter dying in great agony the next morning.

In 1851, near the Sans Souci, F. R. Wright and
H. D. Evans met and exchanged harmless shots,
when the seconds effected a settlement. During the
same year Messrs. Hopkins and Taylor (custom-
house officers) met near Benicia with pistols, but
were arrested and put under bonds to keep the
peace. In 1852 William Leggett and John Morri-
son met near San Francisco with pistols, and Leg-
gett was killed at the third fire. In 1854, David E.
Hacker and J. S. Londen, the latter killed. In 1853,
Edward Rowe and Colonel May, the former wounded
in the neck. In 1852, A. C. Peachy and James
Blain, with pistols; the latter wounded. In 1854,
M. C. Brazer and J. W. Park ; neither hit. In 1853,
near San Francisco, William H. Scott and Peter
Smith (a son of Judge Pinckney Smith of Missis-
sippi), with pistols, at eighty paces ; the latter killed
at the second fire. In 1852 John Kelley and W. S.
Spear fired at each other three times without effect.

42O THE FIELD OF HONOR.

In 1853, near San Francisco, C. J. Wright and Oliver
T. Baird, with pistols ; the latter wounded in the
neck at the second fire. In 1854, near Los Angeles,
H. P. . Dorsey and R. Beveno, with pistols ; both
severely wounded.

One of the last duels (if not, indeed, the very last)
fought in California was that between James R.
Smedberg and F. W. Gardener, in August, 1869. It
was fought in the morning, at Sansalito — a pretty
place on the bay opposite San Francisco — with duel-
ling-pistols ; and Smedberg was wounded in the
right hand at the second fire. Mr. Smedberg is a
member of a very old and respectable family of
New York, and Gardner is a son of a former Gov-
ernor of Massachusetts. Both displayed great cool-
ness on the field. Smedberg was attended by Stuart
M. Taylor, and Gardner by Howard Crittenden.

BLOODLESS DUELS. 421

CHAPTER XXIII.
BLOODLESS DUELS.

John Randolph and Henry Clay — General James Hamilton's
Graphic Account of this Duel — Randolph's Death in Phila-
delphia— The Bloodless Duel between Congressmen Edward
Stanly and Henry A. Wise — How Reverdy Johnson Lost his
Eyesight — The Last Meeting at Bladensburg — The Stanly-Inge
Duel — The Last Occasion on which Powder was Burnt on
Account of Debates in Congress — Ch. Lee Jones's Account of
the Affair — The Gwin-McCorkle Duel — Dumont and "Jim" Lane
— Clingman and Yancey — Morgan and Henderson — Daniels
and Ganahl — Davidson and Lindsay ; and Others.

THE most distinguished meeting that has ever
taken place in the United States in which there was
no bloody mischief committed was that famous
"affair of honor" between the illustrious Clay of
Kentucky and Randolph of Virginia, which took
place near Washington, on the Virginia shore of
the Potomac, just above the Little Falls bridge, at
four o'clock Saturday afternoon, April 8, 1826. Ran-
dolph was one of the best shots in Virginia ; but,
from being unaccustomed to fire with a hair-trigger,
his pistol exploded before the word was given, the
muzzle being down. On the word being given for
the second time, Mr. Clay fired without effect, Mr.
Randolph discharging his pistol in the air. As soon
as Mr. Clay saw that Randolph had thrown away his
fire, he approached the latter and said, with emotion:

422 THE PI ELD OF HONOR.

" I trust in God, my dear sir, you are untouched.
After" what has occurred, I would not have harmed
you for a thousand worlds."

The following is an account of the duel frolfo the
pen of General James Hamilton, of South Carolina,
who was an eye-witness :

The night before Mr. Randolph sent for me, I found him
calm, but in a singularly kind and confiding mood. He told
me that he had something on his mind to tell me. He then
remarked : " Hamilton, I have determined to receive, with-
out returning, Clay's fire ; nothing shall induce me to harm
a hair of his head ; I will not make his wife a widow, nor
his children orphans. Their tears would be shed over his
grave ; but when the sod of Virginia rests on my bosom
there is not one in this wide world, not one individual, to
pay this tribute upon mine." His eyes filled ; and, resting
his head upon his hand, we remained some minutes silent.
I replied: "My dear friend [for ours was a sort of posthu-
mous friendship, bequeathed by our mothers], I deeply regret
that you have mentioned the subject to me ; for you call
upon me to go to the field and see you shot down, or to
assume the responsibility, in regard to your own life, in sus-
taining your determination to throw it away. But on this
subject a man's own conscience and his own bosom are his
best monitors. I will not advise ; but, under the enormous
and unprovoked personal insult you have offered Mr. Clay,
I cannot dissuade. I feel bound, however, to communicate
to Colonel Tatnall your decision."

He begged me not to do so, and said he was very much
afraid that Tatnall would take the studs and refuse to go
out with him. I, however, sought Colonel Tatnall, and we
repaired about midnight to Mr. Randolph's lodgings, whom
we found reading Milton's great poem. For some moments
he did not permit us to say one word in relation to the ap-
proaching duel ; and he at once commenced one of those
delightful criticisms on a passage of this poet, in which he

BLOODLESS DUELS. 423

was wont so enthusiastically to indulge. After a pause,
Colonel Tatnall remarked : " Mr. Randolph, I am told you
have determined not to return Mr. Clay's fire ; I must say
to you, my dear sir, if I am only to go out to see you shot
down, you must find some other friend." Mr. Randolph
remarked that such was his determination. After much
conversation on the subject, I induced Colonel Tatnall to
allow Mr. Randolph to take his own course, as his with-
drawal as one of his friends might lead to very injurious
misconstructions. At length, Mr. Randolph, smiling, said :
" Well, Tatnall, I promise you one thing : if I see the devil
in Clay's eye, and that, with malice prepense, he means to
take my life, I may change my mind" — a remark I knew
he made merely to propitiate the anxieties of his friend.

Mr. Clay and himself met at four o'clock the succeeding
evening, on the banks of the Potomac. But he saw no
" devil in Clay's eye," but a man fearless and expressing the
mingled sensibility and firmness which belonged to the oc-
casion.

I shall never forget this scene as long as I live. It has
been my misfortune to witness several duels, but I never saw
one, at least in its sequel, so deeply affecting. The sun was
just setting behind the blue hills of Randolph's own Virginia.
Here were two of the most extraordinary men our country in
its prodigality had produced, about to meet in mortal com-
bat. Whilst Tatnall was loading Randolph's pistol, I ap-
proached my friend, I believed, for the last time. I took his
hand ; there was not in its touch the quivering of one pulsa-
tion. He turned to me and said : " Clay is calm, but not
vindictive ; I hold my purpose, Hamilton, in any event ; re-
member this."

On handing him his pistol, Colonel Tatnall sprung the
hair-trigger. Mr. Randolph said, "Tatnall, although I am
one of the best shots in Virginia with either pistol or gun,
yet I never fire with a hair-trigger ; besides, I have a thick
buckskin glove on, which will destroy the delicacy of my
touch, and the trigger may fly before I know where I am."
But, from his great solicitude for his friend, Tatnall insisted

424 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

upon hairing the trigger. On taking their positions, the fact
turned out as Mr. Randolph anticipated : his pistol went off
before the word, with the muzzle down.

The moment this event took place, General Jesup, Mr.
Clay's friend, called out that he would instantly leave the
ground with his friend if that occurred again. Mr. Clay at
once exclaimed that it was an accident, and begged that the
gentleman might be allowed to go on. On the word being
given, Mr. Clay fired without effect, Mr. Randolph discharg-
ing his pistol in the air.

The moment Mr. Clay saw that Mr. Randolph had thrown
away his fire, with a gush of sensibility he instantly ap-
proached Mr. Randolph, and said, with an emotion I never
can forget : "I trust in God, my dear sir, you are untouched.
After what has occurred, I would not have harmed you for a
thousand worlds."

In 1879 a member of the old regime contributed to
the Washington Sunday Herald the following interest-
ing account of the excitement at the National Capi-
tal on the day of the duel :

John Randolph seems to have had an innate dislike of the
Kentuckians, Henry Clay included. He always regarded
Kentucky as a sort of dependency on Virginia, and the peo-
ple of the former State as an inferior race to those of the Old
Dominion. Randolph was bred in the ways of the old
school, when the overseer and the country storekeeper ap-
proached the great landholder hat in hand. The freedom
and equality that prevailed in Kentucky were extremely dis-
tasteful to him. Although nominally a member of the same
party with Mr. Clay when the latter entered Congress, he
generally voted with the Federalists. His most intimate
friends in Congress, James Lloyd, Timothy Pickering, and
Josiah Quincy of Massachusetts, Gouverneur Morris and
Rufus King of New York, were of the same party, as were
his two most intimate friends in Virginia, John Wickham
and Dr. Brockenbrough. His speeches against the War of

BLOODLESS DUELS.

1812 were of Demosthenean eloquence and power, and were
circulated by the Northern Federalists by thousands in their
respective districts. Mr. Clay, as the champion of the war-
party in the House, came in, of course, for his share of con-
demnation in these philippics.

In the year 1826 Mr. Clay was Secretary of State and Mr.
Randolph a member of the Senate. In a speech in that body
Randolph alluded to Clay's alliance with Adams as a union
of the "black-leg and the Puritan" — " Blifil and Black
George." Mr. Clay challenged him. What would be thought
now if Mr. Evarts should challenge Mr. Bayard " for words
spoken in debate" ? Tatnall, of Georgia, and Hamilton, of
South Carolina, were Mr. Randolph's seconds. When they
called upon him the evening before the encounter to make
the last arrangements they found him reading Milton ; and
he entered upon an essay on his genius, from which he could
not be diverted until the hour was so late that very few
words were said about the duel or anything else. Mr. Clay
was accompanied to the field by General Jesup, U. S. A., a
Kentuckian like himself, and by Dr. Huntt, the celebrated
physician and surgeon. The duel was a bloodless one ; but
so long a time elapsed before the parties returned that Mr.
Clay's friends were apprehensive that he had fallen. General
Harrison (of Ohio) was a Senator at that time, and lived at
Mrs. Clark's, on F Street, where Cammack's building now
stands. Mr. Clay lived directly opposite, in the large house
removed for the erection of the Corcoran building. Mr.
Nicholas Callan, then eighteen years old, lived next door to
Mr. Clay, and was accustomed, with his friend Hoban, to
visit General Harrison every afternoon to direct speeches
and documents. Mr. Callan states that the General was
very agreeable in his intercourse with these young gentle-
men, and that they became attached to him from his eviden-
kindness of heart. [He had no idea then of -being a cant
didate for the Presidency.] One day, however, when they
were engaged as usual, the General appeared dejected. He
sat with head depressed and said nothing. At last he saw
Mr. Clement Dorsey (M.C. from Maryland) passing by, when

426 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

he opened the window and called out, in his stentorian voice,
" Dorsey ! Dorsey !" Dorsey came up to the General's apart-
ments, and was warmly welcomed. " Mr. Clay is dead !" said
the General. " I hope not," said Dorsey, in his peculiar
falsetto voice. "But," said the General, "he was to have
returned by four o'clock, and it is now past five." Just then
young Callan espied Mr. Clay on horseback, coming around
the corner of Fifteenth Street, and announced his return to
General Harrison. The General, who was in his dressing-
gown, rushed downstairs bareheaded, and ran over to Mr.
Clay, with skirts streaming in the wind, and affectionately
embraced him as he dismounted from his horse. General
Jesup passed soon afterward on his way to his house on F
near Thirteenth Street, now the residence of his son-in-law,
Colonel Sitgreaves. The duel was fought above George-
town, and Randolph came on the field in a flannel dressing-
gown, which was perforated by Clay's ball. Randolph fired
in the air.

Not long before Randolph's death, in 1833, he passed
through Washington on his way from Roanoke to New Castle
to catch the Philadelphia packet for Liverpool. He drove
an English chariot with four blooded horses of different
colors ; and, as he remarked to his friend, Governor Lloyd,
in Baltimore, the next day : " Nothing but the blood of my
nags brought me through." Juba was on the box, and Ran-
dolph reclined at full length inside. He was driven to the
Senate Chamber, where he reposed on a sofa. Hearing Mr.
Clay speak, he said : " Raise me up ; I want to hear that
voice once more." Then he mounted his chariot and went
his way northward, but when he reached New Castle the
Algonquin had passed down on her way to Liverpool, her
royals still visible in the southeastern horizon as she bore
gallantly down to the Capes. So Randolph went on to
Philadelphia, where he died not long afterward at the
Columbian Hotel, on Chestnut Street, and where most elo-
quent eulogies were pronounced over his bier by Horace
Binney and John Sargent, the latter describing him "as
Cicero eloquent, as Cato incorruptible."

BLOODLESS DUELS. 427

After Mr. Randolph's death Mr. Clay told his friend Mr.
Ogle Tayloe that "he had been warned many years ago to
beware of Mr. Randolph ; that he was bent on a duel, say-
ing 'he preferred to be killed by Mr. Clay to any other
death.' " For years, says Mr. Tayloe, Mr. Randolph sought
a duel which Mr. Clay had averted until at last he thought
it unavoidable.

In 1842 an " affair" in which there was no blood-
shed took place (or nearly took place) between Hon.
Edward Stanly, Congressman from North Carolina,
and Hon. Henry A. Wise, Congressman from Vir-
ginia. These gentlemen had long belonged to the
same political party, and had been warm personal
and political friends. When President Tyler, by
vetoing the United States Bank bill, left the Whigs
and went over to the Democrats, he carried with him
a very small party — about half a dozen from the
Whig ranks — who acquired the cognomen of the
" Corporal's Guard." Mr. Wise was one of the most
prominent of this "Guard," and the former personal
and political friendship that had existed between him
and Mr. Stanly was changed into the most bitter per-
sonal and political enmity. Many were the personal
altercations that took place on the floor of the House
of Representatives, which ought (says Ch. Lee Jones
in a letter to the New York Sun) under the code to
have called for explanation from one or the other of
those gentlemen; "but neither took the initiative,
each alleging that the message ought to come from
the other — a very erroneous conception on both sides
of the requirements of the code of honor, which pre-
scribes it as the duty of gentlemen, when language
has mutually passed requiring notice, that there
should be no haggling about who should send the

428 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

first message. These differences finally culminated
on the race-course, near Washington. Both gentle-
men were present on horseback. Mr. Stanly riding
a hard-mouthed horse, in galloping by, accidentally
brushed against Mr. Wise, which Mr. Wise mistook
for an intentional affront, and riding up to Mr. Stanly
struck him with his horsewhip. This, of course,
brought matters to a final issue, and a challenge was
sent by Mr. Stanly by the hands of Hon. Reverdy
Johnson, and was accepted by Mr. Wise. But, while
Mr. Johnson was preparing his principal for the field
at a country-seat some three miles from Baltimore, in
trying the pistols, he fired one at a tree, and the ball
struck a dead and seasoned spot, rebounded, and
struck him directly in the eye, knocking him down.
The ball was afterward found, upon a surgical exam-
ination, under the eyelid, perfectly flattened ; and
while the eyeball was apparently uninjured, the sight
was forever destroyed, although a casual observer
would not have noticed the defect." Thirty years
afterward, in the old age of Mr. Johnson, the sight of
the other eye, through sympathy, became impaired,
and that excellent and distinguished gentleman met
his much regretted death from a misstep in conse-
quence of his defective vision. This sad accident
necessitated Mr. Stanly to procure another second ;
and in making this selection, he procured the services
of John M. McCarty, familiarly known as Colonel
Jack McCarty, who had the reputation of being a
regular "fire-eater," from the desperate duel, fought
in 1819 with muskets at a few feet distance, in which
he killed his kinsman, • Armistead T. Mason. But
Colonel McCarty, notwithstanding his reputation as a
" fire-eater," was one of the most genial and best-

BLOODLESS DUELS. 429

hearted of men ; and he, to his credit (says Mr.
Jones), "succeeded in bringing about an honorable
and amicable adjustment, notwithstanding the blow
that had passed. A vulgar error had prevailed that
a blow was a mortal insult, requiring blood. It is
true that, under the old French code, such was the
rule; but this notion had long since been exploded
in England and in this country, and not the least cen-
sure ought to have rested on Mr. Stanly on account of
the settlement of that affair, although many gentle-
men at the time considered that Mr. Stanly had com-
promised his honor by not having insisted upon at
least a meeting and an apology on the field or a shot."
A bloodless duel, and the last fought at Bladens-
burg, was that one in June, 1836, between the Hon.
Jesse A. Bynum (of North Carolina) and Hon. Daniel
Jenifer (of Maryland), in consequence of a misunder-
standing in the House of Representatives, when, after
six shots were exchanged without damage to either
party, the affair was amicably adjusted. The Hon.
Baillie Peyton (of Tennessee) and Hon. Francis W.
Pickens (of South Carolina) were seconds of Mr.
Jenifer, and the Hon. Edward A. Hannegan (of Indi-
anna) and the Hon. H. A. Savier (of Arkansas) were
the seconds of Mr. Bynum. It is extraordinary and
incomprehensible (says Mr. Ch. Lee Jones of North
Carolina) that gentlemen of the character of each of
these seconds should have permitted so many shots
to have been exchanged in a case growing out of
language used in debate. A " British Code," pub-
lished in 1824, lays down the rule that ''three fires"
should be the ultimatum in any case, as any further
firing would reduce the duel to a conflict for blood,
or subject the parties to ridicule for incapacity in

430 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

arms. And great was the ridicule attempted to be
heaped on Messrs. Bynum and Jenifer by the journal-
ists of the day on account of their bad shooting.

The last duel fought by Congressmen was the
(bloodless) meeting between Hon. Samuel W. Inge (of
Alabama) and Hon. Edward Stanly (of North Caro-
lina), which took place near Washington on the 24th
of February, 1851. This was the last occasion on
which powder was burnt in the United States on ac-
count of debates in Congress. Hon. Jefferson Davis,
of Mississippi (later President of the Southern Con-
federacy), was the second of Mr. Inge, and Colonel
Ch. Lee Jones, a distinguished North Carolinian, at-
tended Mr. Stanly. In a debate upon the River and
Harbor bill, Mr. Bayly (of Virginia) had expressed
the opinion that, in the appropriations proposed, the
bill was "sectional," which statement Mr. Stanly had
controverted. Mr. Inge submitted an. amendment
providing for the improvement of certain rivers in
Alabama and Mississippi, and in some remarks which
followed referred to the course of Mr. Stanly, and
said: "If the South were to wait for that gentleman's
warning she would sleep in eternal unconsciousness;
she would sleep until every assault was perpetrated,
and until her spoliation was complete. ... It is not
from him that I should expect admonition of danger
to the South." This produced a personal discussion,
which, as officially reported, was in these terms:

Mr. Stanly — I have a single word to say. I do not believe
the gentleman from Alabama wants the appropriation which
he asks ; but has offered the amendment, under the rule, that
he might make an unkind and unprovoked fling at me. I
do not know what I have done to incur the gentleman's dis-
pleasure.

BLOODLESS DUELS. 431

Mr. Inge — I merely stated facts and drew inferences.

Mr. Stanly — The gentleman said that the spoliation of the
South could take place before she would hear a warning
from me. The gentleman shows that he has little sense and
less charity when he charges me with being unfriendly to the
South. I repeat, I am unconscious of what unkindness I
have done to provoke the gentleman.

Mr. Inge — I did not hear the gentleman. Will he be good
enough to repeat what he said ?

Mr. Stanly — I say you have little sense and less charity in
charging me with unfriendliness to the South.

Mr. Inge — I say that that remark is ungentlemanly and
unparliamentary, and comes from a blackguard.

Mr. Stanly — Mr. Chairman, he charges me with being a
blackguard. He has just shown to the House and to the
country that he is one.

The Chairman — Personalities are not in order.

Mr. Stanly — No ; personalities are not in order. I am
willing to let our conduct be judged of by the public; and let
them estimate his character and mine. As to my friendship
for the South, let the record and my conduct speak whether
I have not more friendship for the South than those noisy
traitors who impeach others and seek the applause of the
grog-shops at cross-roads at home by their own professions
of devotion, and by crying eternally, " There is danger,
danger to the South !" Even those who voted with a
majority of Southern members upon certain measures are
uncharitably assailed. I regret I have been called on to say
anything. I was unconscious of giving any provocation.
The gentleman cast the first stone, and he will make the
most of what I have said. I shall hereafter treat remarks
from that quarter with the contempt they deserve.

Hon. William M. Gwin, United States Senator from
California, and Hon. J. W. McCorkle, M.C. from the
same State, met in California on the ist of June, 1853,
with rifles, at thirty paces, the combatants to wheel at

43 2 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

the word and fire, which the two gentlemen did
three times without harming each other, when the
affair was brought to a termination, the friends of the
two gentlemen making the following statement:

After an exchange of three ineffectual shots between the
Hon. William M. Gwin and Hon. J. W. McCorkle, the friends
of the respective parties, having discovered that their prin-
cipals were fighting under a misapprehension of facts,
mutually explained to their respective principals in what the
misapprehension consisted, whereupon Dr. Gwin promptly
denied the cause of provocation referred to in Mr. McCorkle's
letter of the 29Lh of May, and Mr. McCorkle withdrew his
offensive language uttered on the race-course, and expressed
regret at having used it.

[Signed] S. W. INGE,

F. STUART,
E. C. MARSHALL,
E. C. FITZHUGH,
GEO. P. JOHNSON,
June i, 1853. A. P. CRITTENDEN.

In 1851, in Indiana, Lieutenant-Governor J. H. Lane
and Colonel Ebenezer Dumont met with pistols, but
the former withdrew his challenge on the field.
Senator Clingman (of North Carolina) and Congress-
man Yancey (of Alabama) once met near Washington
and fired one shot at each other with pistols, when the
seconds — Ch. Lee Jones for Clingman, and Congress-
man Huger (of South Carolina) for Yancey — adjusted
the matter satisfactorily. In 1851, in Georgia, H. Mor-
gan and W. Henderson fired at each other twice, when
their seconds terminated the affair. In the same
State, in 1852, a similar meeting and like result took
place between Thomas Daniels and Charles Ganahl.
In 1854, in Arkansas, Hon. A. H. Davidson and Colonel

BLOODLESS DUELS. 433

W. M. Lindsay met with pistols, exchanged shots, and
retired from the field friends. In 1868, in Maryland,
General Lawrence (United States Minister to Costa
Rica) and Baron Kusserow (of the Prussian Embassy)
fiied at each other with pistols, without effect.

434 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

CHAPTER XXIV.
THE RAREST KIND OF BRAVERY.

Conspicuous Examples of Men who have been and are Too
Brave to Accept Challenges to Fight Duels — A Courageous
Frenchman — Alexander Skinner — Why Sam Houston Declined*
to Meet Judge Burnett — An Anecdote of Raleigh — Sumner and
Harney — A Noble Interpretation of the Laws of Honor — Sir
John Dalrymple and Lord Barrington — Lee's Challenge to Judge
Drayton — Reply of the Eminent South Carolinian — Gunn's
Challenges to Greene — Stanley and Johnston of the Navy — The
Effect of Eloquence — A Modern Virginian of First- Family Blood
who will not Fight in Duels, and Why — An Irish Veteran who
Never Fought a Duel — An Instructive and Interesting Story —
General Francis Marion's Courage — Morton McMichael's Treat-
ment of a Challenge from James Cooper — A Challenge Poeti-
cally Declined.

WE can readily understand the position of the
challenged person during the days of what was termed
the established " code of honor ;" and can compre-
hend, in all its truthfulness and force, the declaration
of Senator Henry Clay — that incomparable ornament
to American statesmanship — when he admitted (while
favoring a Senate bill against duelling in the Dis-
trict of Columbia) that " the man with a high sense of
honor and nice sensibility, when the question is
whether he shall fight or have the finger of scorn
pointed at him, is irtiable to resist ; and few, very few,
are found willing to adopt such an alternative." But

THE RAREST KIND OF BRAVERY. 435

there have lived many brave, chivalrous, and honor-
able men — among Americans, Englishmen, Irishmen,
and Frenchmen in particular — who have presented
exhibitions of that greatest of all kinds of courage — •
the courage to decline a challenge.

Some 550 years before Christ, the King of Assyria
declined to settle a difficulty by single combat with
the King of Persia. Caesar once declined a challenge
from Marc Antony. In 1195 Philip, King of France,
took no notice of a cartel of defiance from John, King
of England. In 1342 Edward the Third, of England,
sent a challenge to Philip de Valois, King of France,
which the latter declined. Sir Thomas Prendergast,
an officer in the army of Queen Anne, was once chal-
lenged by a brother-officer named Pennant, and de-
clined the invitation.

In 1589 the chivalric Earl of Essex challenged the
Governor of Lisbon to meet him in a personal en-
counter, on horse or on foot. But that official treated
Essex's cartel of defiance with silent contempt. In
1591 Essex challenged the Governor of Rouen to meet
him, and decide by single combat which was the bet-
ter man or which served the fairest mistress ; but
that functionary declined. In 1850 Sir Thomas Hast-
ings, a British admiral, challenged Hon. Richard
Cobden, M.P. ; Mr. Cobden declined, however, and
published the letter of challenge. In 1778 General
Lafayette challenged the Earl of Carlisle, an Eng-
lish Commissioner to the United States ; the Earl de-
clined to give personal satisfaction for acts performed
in the discharge of public duties. In 1853 the Earl of
Mornington challenged the Earl of Shaftesbury for re-
marks made in the House of Lords. The latter, how-
ever, declared that, notwithstanding the impertinence

THE FIELD OF HONOR.

of the challenger, he spurned his letter of defiance,
and would make no retraction ; whereupon the belli-
cose Mornington subsided. In 1410 Henry the
Fourth, of England, declined to meet the Scotch Duke
of Rothsay in a personal encounter. In 1402 Henry
declined a challenge from Louis, the Duke of Orleans,
on the ground, so his majesty declared, that he knew
" of no precedent which offered the example of a
crowned king entering the lists to fight a duel with a
subject, however high the rank of that subject might
be." In 1196 Richard the First, of England, refused
a like cartel of defiance from Philip the Second, of
France. General Lemery, of New York, was chal-
lenged by Monsieur Angero, in 1852, and declined ;
partly on the ground that his official acts were not
amenable on individual appeals for satisfaction, and
partly because it would be a violation of his military
rank, and also a violation of the law of the State of
New York. On May 3, 1852, ex-Congressman John
Barney, of Maryland, challenged Monsieur Sartiges,
Minister of France to the United States, which the
latter declined.

During 1867, in a debate in the French Legislature
upon books for a public library, M. St. Beuve took
occasion to vindicate the character of the creations of
George Sand, Ernest Renan, and Pelletan, when he
was violently interrupted by M. Lacaze, but pursued
the even tenor of his course just as though no rude-
ness had been displayed. For this " offence" the cele-
brated French scholar and critic was challenged to
mortal combat — not that he had actually insulted
Monsieur Lacaze, but because he had, according to
the latter's mercurial interpretation, " betrayed an in-
tention to insult ; and such design should be unmis-

THE RAREST KIND OF BRAVERY. 437

takably considered as equivalent to the act" — which
reminds one of the anecdote of the Teuton who had
thrashed his child Hans, not because the youngster
had been profane, but that he had thought " Gott
tarn." St. Beuve, however, declined to accept the
challenge, but addressed to M. Lacaze an unimpas-
sioned letter, setting forth his reasons for such action,
in which he said that he preferred " not to accept
that summary jurisprudence which consists in strang-
ling a question and suppressing an individual at one
and the same time. Our differences, sir, it seems to
me, should be settled by free discussion ; for my own
part, I propose to at least reflect before proceeding
further ; for, if I mistake not, I shall break some laws
which I have sworn to uphold and protect if I accede
to your proposition. Besides, there is no gentleman
among all my friends who understands properly the
etiquette of duelling, which does not mean, sir, that
they are the less men of honor, but that they have
taken no degree of Doctor in Arms." Instead of act-
ing the gentleman, upon receiving St. Beuve's excel-
lent note, Lacaze raved and played the bully, and
sent a second challenge, couched in furious terms, to
which St. Beuve responded in less gentle but in no
less dignified language. To use an Americanism, he
"sat down" so ponderously upon " Sir Lucius O'Trig-
ger" Lacaze, in expressing his absolute refusal to
meet him in mortal combat, that the bellicose Gaul
went off and " granulated."

On the 25th of March, 1854, after an unusually warm
debate in Congress between Hon. John C. Breckin-
ridge, of Kentucky, and Hon. Francis B. Cutting, of
New York, a "correspondence" passed between the
two gentlemen, but a hostile meeting was prevented

43 8 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

by the interposition of four courageous men — Colonel
Hawkins and Hon. William Preston, of Kentucky, on
the part of Breckinridge, and Senator Shields, of
Illinois, and Colonel Monroe, of New York, for Mr.
Cutting. On October 25, 1803, after an exciting de-
bate in the United States Senate (the day before),
Senator Dayton, -of New Jersey, challenged Senator
De Witt Clinton, of New York, who made a satisfac-
tory explanation. In 1853 Hon. Richard H. Weight-
man, Delegate to Congress from New Mexico, re-
ceived a challenge from Francis J. Thomas, and
treated it with contempt. In 1681 Mr. Williams,
Speaker of the House of Commons, declined to re-
ceive a challenge from Sir Robert Peyton.

Alexander Skinner, a surgeon in the Revolutionary
army, from Maryland, who had killed one man in a
duel, declined all challenges thereafter, on the ground,
he said, that "killing a fellow-man does not become
me, set apart as I am to take care of the sick and the
wounded, and to do all in my power to prolong and
not to destroy human life."

General Houston, after his meeting with General
White, declined at least two, if not three or four,
duels. He treated with indifference a challenge from
Commodore E. W. Moore, of the Texan navy, in 1845;
and in his remarks explaining why he declined a
meeting with Judge Burnett he said : " I objected to
it, first, on the ground that we were to have but one
second, and that was the man who brought the chal-
lenge. Another objection was that we were to meet
on Sunday morning, and I did not think that any-
thing was to be made by fighting on that day. The
third objection was that he was a good Christian,
and had had his child baptized the Sunday before.

THE RAREST KIND OF BRA VER Y. 439

The fourth was that I never fought down hill, and I
never would. I must, at least, make character, if I
did not lose my life ; and, therefore, I notified him in
that way. He seemed to be satisfied with this good-
humored answer, and it is the only challenge I have
ever received in Texas. And I will avail myself of
this occasion now to declare that I never made a
quarrel with a mortal man on earth ; nor will I ever
do anything to originate a quarrel with any man,
woman, or child living. If they quarrel with me, it is
their privilege ; but I shall try to take care that they do
me no harm"

The great Raleigh, after having killed a number of
men in duels, at last made a solemn vow never again to
send or accept a challenge ; and he kept his word.
One day, however, a young man, while disput-
ing with him, challenged Raleigh, and then spat in
his face ; at which Sir Walter took out his handker-
chief, and, wiping his face, said : " Young man, if I
could as easily wipe from my conscience the stain of
killing you as I can this spittle from my face, you
should not live another minute."

General Sumner, who fell in battle during the War
of the Rebellion, once sent a challenge to General
Harney, who not only declined to accept it, but saw
to it that his distinguished antagonist was court-mar-
tialled, the proceedings of which took place at Carlisle
Barracks (Pa.). Harney was also once challenged by
Lieutenant Ihrie, U. S. A.

Two French noblemen (the Marquis de Valaze
and the Count de Merci), who had been educated and
brought up together, and who had never stained
their attachment by word or act, one evening quar-
relled in a gaming-house, during which the Count, in

440 THE FIELD OF HONOR.

a fit of rage superinduced by ill-success at play and
frequent indulgence in burgundy, threw a dice-box in
the face of his friend, who had exulted a good deal
over his own good luck. In an instant the entire com-
pany were in amazement, and aw